Or have Administration propagandists had to come up with an emotionally appealing cover story, one that the American people might accept? Perhaps "He tried to kill my DADDY!" is a vain effort to cloak an act of naked greed and aggression in a veil of justifiable, or at least understandable violence. Peace. _____________ Youth is the first victim of war - the first fruit of peace. It takes 20 years or more of peace to make a man; it takes only 20 seconds of war to destroy him. -- King Boudewijn I, King of Belgium (1934-1993)
I think it's more Dubya's reaction formation response to his unconscious and repressed Oedipel wish to kill his father and have sex with his mother. Dubya feels guilty that he desired this, and is lashing out at Hussain as a proxy to simultaneously deny that he wanted to kill his father and in order to upstage his father, thus getting into Barbara's panties. Bush Sr. failed to eliminate Hussain with his missiles (an obvious phallic symbol), thus Dubya feels that if he uses larger missiles to destroy Hussain, Barbara will think he has a larger penis (thus curing the Dub's castration anxiety, which led him to seek to dominate others in order to re-affirm his masculinity i.e his possession of power confirms his possession of a penis) and will thus Dubya will resolve the dispute his Oedipel complex caused between his superego and id by vanquishing his rival/father by affirming that he has a larger penis. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Zeal to the Ridiculous One thing as a president is to use your power on personal gains for a free blow-job, a total different thing is to misuse it to revenge your personal ideals or try to finish what his father didn't. ...Specially if it has to do with petrol! He'll get two birds with a single stone. Yes, Saddam Husein is evil, but there are so, so many for so long out there. Any country deciding "in the name of ethics and humanity", to endeavor in cleansing suffering countries and people around this world, better have its ethics and moral in proper check, otherwise as it is the case with US, the rule of double-standards, as it is internationally known will have an irreversible damage to their society for a very long future. One reason why the world consensus (incl. China & Rusis) is allowing US Gov. to continue with their childish politics and games, is because the outcome and implications will only end-up damaging the US Gov. And all the other countries would benefit from it. ...The greatest Iraqi weapon is their petrol reserve. In five to ten years, (when needed). They would not need to exploit or develop any thing. They will just purchase it clandestinely and ready made. We Americans don't only have a responsibility to vote our governments but more sure to judge and affect the way in which they represent us.
I don't see why people have a problem with the United States removing Saddam. Here's a guy who tortures and kills his political opponents, uses nerve gas on villages of his own people, resells the medical supplies sent to his country via the oil-for-food program on foreign markets rather than distributing them to his own dieing people, practices organized genocide against the Kurds, destroyed his country's economy and killed over a million people by starting a pointless war with Iran…the list goes on. When you consider Saddam's record, why are we bothering to quibble over whether or not he's cooperating with weapon inspectors? He's an evil guy who needs to be taken out of power. His own citizens hate him and his regime so much that half the country tried to rebel after the Gulf War. The sooner is he removed from office the better the world in general and the Iraqi people in particular will be. It's a pretty sad statement about the United State's government that they waited until it was politically convenient to get around to removing him, but that doesn't change the fact that he needs to be removed.
And how do you know Iraqis hate Saddam any more than Americans hate Bush? The only evidence we have is defectors, and they aren't a very good representation of a population.
Saddam Threat to the United States: None! Benefit to the Oil companies: Guess! Need more be said? Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
After the gulf war huge sections of Iraq tried to rebel. Government officials were killed by angry mobs and hung from light posts. Saddam had to send in Republican Guard armor units to regain control. I'd call that a pretty good indication that most Iraqis aren't too happy with their government.
Of course its personal. Heck, its personal to ME. Of course it would be personal to bush. Despite this putting the squeeze on Iraq, and in fact anyone who has the audacity to shoot at our planes, is the best course of action. Personally I think we should go after Sudan next for its human rights violations (ie: slavery)
Like I said, it was right after the war. The regime hasn't gotten any less oppressive since the insurrections were crushed, so I doubt that whatever sentiments inspired the mobs to string up government officials have changed much. It's not surprising that there haven't been any major rebellions since then; now that the Iraqi army isn't distracted with fighting the coalition, they have gone back to their full-time job of keeping the population in line by torturing and killing anyone who they suspect of disloyalty.
Nasor, The main reason why people don't want to dispose of Saddam is because of the implications, which are very real and will hurt us gravely. Granted, Saddam is totalitarian and cruel. But a war to get rid of him will cost the lives of many innocent civilians, the very ones we are trying to save. We will be fighting urban warfare against the Republican Guard, and there is no assurance that that will be an easy fight. Not only will we inevitably kill thousands of innocents, we will put ourselves at great risk. Assuming Saddam has weapons of mass destruction, our objective is to get rid of the WMD. But, we don't know where the WMD are, and that's part of the arguement against inspections, them Iraqis are too damn clever. Once Saddam is gone, then the only people who know where the weapons are hidden will be very desperate people more than willing to sell them to the real terrorists. Also, much of the animosity towards the US is the stationing of American troops on Arab soil. Imagine how riled up these people will be once we bomb one of their countries into the stone age. Regardless of whether Saddam is cruel dictator, the consequences both to the Iraqi people and ourselves will be greater than expected. As far as regime change goes, maybe if the US had put it's back into the support of international courts, we would be able to justifiably remove his toxic prescence. But flat out war is not the answer, and will probably cause more harm than good.
Goofyfish One of my relatives sent me an interesting article a while back speculating on Bush's agenda. In it was detailed an elaborate plan to bluff Saddam with the threat of force, seize the initiative once he made concessions, and bring greater democracy to the Arab world. "Hussein tried to kill my dad." I looked at her and said "Na, I don't think so."
