This Story is Archived
Op Ed: Denying the Facts, Finding the Truth »
Posted by: deathray 1 year, 9 months agoThe United States is continuing, through other means, the greatest crime of Saddam Hussein: his never-ending attempt to topple the Iranian government.
Read Full Story at nytimes.com »
Submitted By:
deathray
Hm...summarizing a life...Investment banker, sailor, unintentional gourmet cook. Ex US Naval officer, also Foreign Service. Split my time between NYC and Miami Beach ...
This Story is Archived and Commenting is Closed
Comments: 230
-
Searunner52
Jan. 5, 2007, 9:25 a.m.Good article although a bit rambling.
The opportunity to assume the leadership role in the global war on terrorism was on September 12, 2001 GW Bush's for the taking. The world community was ready and willing to invest Bush with this mantle of leadership without a single string attached. Well we all know what happened in the months following and by December of that year the United States was scratching the bottom of the barrel to find even a few nations that would support "his" cause! By the time the invasion of Iraq was approaching the only support Bush could garner was from those nations that he had to either pay outright (remember what Turkey demanded just to base our aircraft there?) or make outrageous promises of future economic and or military support. Now, after nearly 4 years and a continually degrading situation in Iraq even the coalition of the bought has become mighty thin.
As if that weren't enough before the first bodies of our war dead were (cont)
-
betruthful
Jan. 5, 2007, 7:51 p.m.Ike5266 - as usual ike ignores facts and rants about the left. What a moron.
-
-
-
Searunner52
Jan. 5, 2007, 9:38 a.m.(cont) cold in their graves (Mission Accomplished) Bush was rattling his saber in the direction of Iran. The manhunt for the man who ordered the attacks of 9/11 were forgotten and the focus shifted from finding the WMD stockpiled of Saddam to the new nuclear threat that Iran posed. It didn't matter that there was nothing in the way of solid intelligence to support his claims (in fact quite the opposite was true as our intelligence agencies stated that Iran was at best 5 years away, far more likely 10 from having a viable program) he was hell bent of taking Iran down.
Since then cooler and perhaps wiser heads have prevailed and finally there is talk being tossed around about seeking a "diplomatic" solution to the situation in Iran, but don't let such talk fool you. Bush doesn't subscribe to it and he is going to use every means at his disposal to "eliminate" this perceived enemy of his before he leaves office and to hell with anyone who stands in his way.
-
samsara15
Jan. 5, 2007, 9:50 a.m.We can't afford another war with another nation which has not attacked us, we don't have the troops or the popular suport, so it behooves us to take the steps required to make sure Iran gradually can liberalize. Although religiously extreme, the present Iranian regime does represent the people, so we have no realistic option except to try to work with them to persuade them to go the way we would like them to go. However, based on our inablility to have any positive influence in Saudi Arabia and the Sauds,we should not be overly optimitics about what our foreign policy can perform in Iran. Bush once had tremendous polical capital; he has spent it carelessly and therefore no longer can count on support from the American populace, so his administration must move prudently in Iran. One has little reason to hope this adminstration can act so circumspectly.
-
contrast
Jan. 5, 2007, 10:02 a.m.I dont think Bush can be considered a "pro-Iranian" president. The refuse to meet each other and even speak. Remember Iran is also on the axis of evil. This writer thinks baghdad bob was refreshing...what are you-a nimrod? Denial is never refreshing denial will only hurt you in the long run. I have seen it in family issues and I have seen it with political issues. Never does looking the other way and refusing the truth lead to great things. Saddam got 100% of the vote and yet not all 100% are weeping from his execution are they? Seems a little weird. It's a thought provoking article but not without its holes ironic an article about denial leaves out some obvious facts. heh heh.
-
lfergie812
Jan. 5, 2007, 1:54 p.m.I think what the article implied was that by Bush taking Saddam out of the picture, Bush aided the Iranians to push their Shiite influence into Iraq.
-
-
Bkumm
Jan. 5, 2007, 10:18 a.m.Ladies and gentlemen, this statement is THE key issue:
"The problem with today's America is not that it is a new global empire, but that it is NOT one. That is, while pretending to be an empire, it continues to act like a nation-state, ruthlessly pursuing its interests. It is as if the guiding vision of recent American politics is a weird reversal of the well-known motto of the ecologists - act globally, think locally."
That is the biggest problem that we face. If we choose to be an Empire then let's be an Empire and get it over with. If we want to be first among equals (pun intended) then let's do that. But, we can't do both.
-
-
natashas
Jan. 5, 2007, 11:03 a.m.Good article, strong points are made. Bush messed this all up, but Saddam had to go. I am surprised that he was so popular in the beginning. If he was still alive his power and influence would have harmed or killed more people.
-
bubba2
Jan. 5, 2007, 11:13 a.m.This is also a searing commentary on the so-called 'justice' of Saddam's trial --
"... when the United States representatives and the Iraqi prosecutors were enumerating his evil deeds, they systematically omitted what was undoubtedly his greatest crime in terms of human suffering and of violating international justice: his invasion of Iran. Why? Because the United States and the majority of foreign states were actively helping Iraq in this aggression."
The Bush administration has NEVER cared about 'justice' and they never cared about finding and eliminating the REAL purpetrators of 9/11.
The Bush administration only cares about carrying out the agenda of the Project for a New American Century. Just as they don't reveal the real crimes of Saddam, they won't reveal their real reasons for invading Iran - which Bush WILL do unless Congress or someone STOPS him.
-
KISA452a
Jan. 5, 2007, 1:04 p.m.Which Iraqi laws were broken in the invasion of Iran? It seems it was decided for whatever reason to have him tried by Iraqis, meaning it had to be for violation of Iraqi law, right? So, murder or whatever he was convicted of would fit in that category. Invading Iran would not. Or perhaps you could fill me in?
-
-
geographer47
Jan. 5, 2007, 12:26 p.m.The present state of affairs in the Middle East cannot be understood unless we remember what actions and alliances have led up to it. It would appear that we want to forget our mistakes and with that we lose the benefits of lessons learned. It can't be said that Presidential advisors aren't old enough to remember past mistakes--ours and others. If our greatest failing is that we have not become a new global empire, it's not for lack of trying. The New American Century would have been that, but lessons taught by Vietnam (earlier French Indo China) and the Soviet's Afghan war were ignored. No one wanted to consider the possibility that Iraq could be another Bosnia. President GW Bush undoubtedly ignored President GHW Bush's explanation of why we didn't go all the way to Baghdad. The only redeeming value of being bogged down in Iraq may be that it has prevented (or pushed back the timeline for) our charging into other countries in the Axis of Evil.
-
not2needy
Jan. 5, 2007, 12:35 p.m.The New American Century would have been that, but lessons taught by Vietnam (earlier French Indo China) and the Soviet's Afghan war were ignored. No one wanted to consider the possibility that Iraq could be another Bosnia.
Well said, Kudos!!
-
LastSamurai
Jan. 5, 2007, 1:09 p.m.I really think it's time to impeach Bush and Chaney. What is the hold up? Are we waiting until they destroy the whole world? Iran and Seria are next unless power is taken away from these madmen. We are Bankrupt as a country. What else can they do to ruin this country to help their corporate friends. I think Ralph Nader said it best of Bush. He called him the Corporation disguised as a person. I find him doing the same things Hitler did to come into power in Germany. Using fear and lies to do whatever he wants.
-
flyrod
Jan. 5, 2007, 2:05 p.m.LS, Your statement is ludicrous. First impeachment is a long process and Bush will be long gone before even a democratic congress can get it together. Second, Iran and (Syria)have proven that they deserve to be treated as a terroist state. As far as going after them. We just don't have that ability. Thank Rumsfeld for that. Third, your statement of a comparison to Hitler is way inappropriate. This just proves that you are so far out in left field that you do not have the slightest notion as to what is really going on. Try reading more that leftist news articles once in awhile. Then come back.
-
-
butterknuckles
Jan. 5, 2007, 1:44 p.m.YES YES YES! I see it now, WE ARE GOING TO CONTROL IRAN...THE MIDDLE EAST... EVERYWHERE. Muhahahahaha (evil laugh).
That. sir, is our ultimate plan. it is true...how did you find out....
Who told you?
Who are you?
What is your name?
YOU CANNOT STOP US!!!!!!!!
crlappppp (another plot of ours pasted all over the front of netscape...)
-
looter
Jan. 5, 2007, 1:52 p.m.hahaha now it is a crime to try to topple the government of another country. How about invading another county, killing about 650,000 of its citizens, capturing that countrys leader and handing him over to terrorists.... that's what we did in Iraq, isn't it? The current government in Iraq is nothing but a terror group we call the government on Iraq. It is just a matter of interpretation. So this article makes it clear the crimes of Bush administration indirectly. hahahaha.
-
Bombadil-YO
Jan. 5, 2007, 5:16 p.m.Iraq even before the war had been turned into a mass grave by the US, since the 1st Persian Gulf War waged by Bush Papa Terrorist and to make matters worst, we kept Iraq padded with sanctions that killed thousands, now this chaos Bushie Jr. has unleashed just shows the world that Saddam Hussein was the leader that was keeping the place together.
-
-
Hobe
Jan. 5, 2007, 1:53 p.m.bumm... You sound Like a very Confused individual???
What in tarnation are you writing about???
Do You understand the artical???
Your response is rather incoherent....
atry again we would like to understand what you are writing about???
Sincerely,
-
Bkumm
Jan. 5, 2007, 2:22 p.m.Most of my comment was a direct quote from the article. Did you read it?
The point is that the US can not continue to act as a nation state while projecting power like an Empire. Either we step up and act like an empire, occupying and controlling territory, making it a part of the empire, or we had better quit trying to make the world in our own image.
That was the writer's point. If we want to be the ones who decide what is right and wrong we are going to have to take responsibility for that. We are not doing so currently.
-
-
-
abntv
Jan. 5, 2007, 2:09 p.m.I thought the article was interesting, however, I totally disagree with the statement that Saddam's greats crime was trying to topple the Iranian government...Saddams greatest crime was what he did to his own people...
-
betruthful
Jan. 5, 2007, 8:09 p.m.Hussien killed about a million Iranians. We gave him alot of help back then and that is one big reason the Iranian people are not fond of our leaders.
-
-
Rabbi
Jan. 5, 2007, 3:58 p.m.The US believes it has the mantle of world leader and is the most powerful country in the world because it has the willingness (not necessarily capacity) to walk into Arab and other smaller states with relaitve impunity.
India and China constitute nearly half the world. They do not in any way condone nor will they tolerate the US's interferenc in their affairs. The former Soviet republics although having differences with each other except for Georgia which will fall anyway make up for the rest which is collectively with India and China and Africa and now Latin America the majority who do not condone the US imperial bullying.
Knowledge is not the sole preserve of any state. The US's knowlede is scavanged from mercenary migrant intellectuals and academics who do not owe moral but economic allegience ot the US. Like every other dictatirial regime in history, the US sees itself as infallible an, inviolable and invincible. That is now their undoing.
-
kaizersozey83
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:24 p.m.do you have a constructive criticism of this article? i don't see one ounce of intelligence in your whine-fest. This IS a worthy article, otherwise it wouldn't be in a national newspaper. And it's called an opinion piece for a reason. You criticism shows that you are more or less threatened by it. By the way, the word TOO is a word that means also, or refers to something in excess, such as "TOO Loud". The word you are looking for is TO.
-
deathray
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:41 p.m.I'll say it again:
"That sithlord's a pain in the ass
His posts they lack any class
He and bobcat6 see
"Nazi Liberal" spree
Their posts smell like they're passing gas..."
-
Bkumm
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:42 p.m.No offense, but have you taken your anti-insane pills today?
I'm not 18 to 24. I don't have a life, but that's because I stay home and take care of my 11 month old son. I own my own home. And I really like Coast to Coast.
What is your problem with the opinion piece from the Times?
-
spetsnaz
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:29 p.m.Isn't it ironic when we first assist foreign countries with our military aid, and then go to war against them. US would be crazy to go to war with Iran now. Our military is way exhausted. The surgical air strike against their nuclear program would not achieve a satisfactory results either, because some of the facilities are deep under ground. I don't like this Ahmadinejad. Looks like he is even more crazier than Saddam.
-
deathray
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:54 p.m.Hm...Russian Special Forces.
They sell a lot of arms to the Inranians...
-
Bkumm
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:57 p.m.Iran wouldn't be the cakewalk that Iraq was, but it still wouldn't take more than a couple of months on the outside. They simply couldn't withstand the combo of economic and military might.
Now, there is virtually no way to control it once we defeat them, but their 'regular' forces wouldn't stand a chance.
-
-
ouzie-q
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:41 p.m.The problem with Iraq is in Iran. The Revolutionary Council has a grand scheme devised which allows it to control the Straits Of Hormuz and dominate world oil shipping lanes.
Their plan for Iraq is a no brainer as well, install a Shiite Theocracy and supress the populace.
Iran is a worldwide sponsor of Islamic terror groups and a major formentor of unrest and instability.
They continue to equip, fund, train and even staff some of the world's foremost "Islamic murder cults."
Lily white liberal p-ussies continue to moan and cry about Iraq, when Iran and Syria are so blatantly behind the evil Islamic Revolution.
If Bush can bust these demented blackhats up...good, damn skippy. Afterall, at least Bush has DONE something, look at the list of Dumbocrat presidents before him who sat on their hands and let the situation blossom.
Iran's regime is evil...they are killing US troops right now, face it this article is trash.
-
deathray
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:42 p.m.One wonders whether Iran would be interfering in Iraq's internal affaitrs to the extent that they are if we had not destabilized the situation there to begin with.
-
Bkumm
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:45 p.m.Do you think that we should attack Iran and Syria? If so, would you support the draft and higher taxes to do so?
-
-
ouzie-q
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:44 p.m.Be a good little Libby,
run home and hide behind mommy's apron strings.
Let real men take on Islamic evil, whilst you slurp your Moolatta from the comfort of mom's basement burka lounger.
How about a hot steaming cup of STFU?
-
ouzie-q
Jan. 5, 2007, 4:46 p.m.Hahahahahaha,
Just laughing...I mean joking; I certainly don't want to offend the sensibilities of pseudo-intellects everywhere.
Hey, it takes an idiot to raise a village.
-
-
-
-
RedstateLib
Jan. 5, 2007, 7:23 p.m."Hey, it takes an idiot to raise a village."
That cannot be true. If it was all those Neo Con Idiots would have been able to rebuild Iraq by now.
-
The first 75 comments are shown. Show all 230 comments »
Got a Story?
