War and Occupation in Iraq

[roadrunner]

"...he was supported right till 1988 by the US for most of his time in power."

Wrong...again.

1979-2003- 24 years in power. 1979-1988- nine years of support. That's not most, is it? Did your math fail you or is that a distortion? Please quit idly tossing about complete distortions if you're going to state something as a fact.

What happened when we came to our senses, btw?:

You're unbelievably pedantic. If you were a teacher, I'd envision you to whack your students, or strangulate them, if they miss a full stop or a comma off the ends of their sentences. <<

The main message behind it was that when Saddum was committing his major "crimes", he was supported by the US. 10 years is an awful long time to be supporting him.

We're sorry and hope we've made adequate amends by delivering the worthless phuck to his maker.

Opinion. Worthless.

"Saddam was a terrorist."

President of Iraq was a terrorist, roadrunner? You probably on principal support the war in Iraq then as I can't imagine that you'd believe it practical or prudent to leave the security of the Persian gulf in the hands of a man who'd used WMD, invaded two neighboring countries, and was a terrorist himself-personally.

Probably warms your heart to think of him swinging, eh"? I hope so anyway. You can bet it does mine.

The Iraq war? No, I didn't actually. Was he a terrorist? Depends in who's eyes. In the eyes of the Kurds he was for not giving them a Kurdish state, in the eyes of the religious Shias he was, for persecuting them. I'm on the fence as to whether he was a terrorist.

 

[S-2]

"You're unbelievably pedantic. If you were a teacher, I'd envision you to whack your students, or strangulate them, if they miss a full stop or a comma off the ends of their sentences."

Irrelevant. What I'm not is habitually in error or a professional dissembler. BTW, you COULD actually be both. That gets my vote.

You said 1988, not me. Nine years, not ten-and definitely not most.

You called him a terrorist and precisely so at that. Now you're "...on the fence as to whether he was a terrorist". All in the space of a couple of posts and not for the first time.

Zig, then zag, then zig again. Like I said earlier, quicksand.

 

[S-2]

"The main message behind it was that when Saddum was committing his major "crimes", he was supported by the US. 10 years is an awful long time to be supporting him."

How "major" was the invasion of Kuwait? Sufficient to put the free world on his azz?

How onerous was his suppression of the Kurds and shias in it's aftermath? And Islam and araby? What of their support? What of their condemnation?

Well, he's gone now and if ten years was an "awful long time to be supporting him", at least a few other nations bear an even longer legacy of taint, don't they roadrunner? Those T-72s in the Republican Guard didn't come from the states.

Glad it was us that dumped him and I sure as hell won't be missing Saddam...