QUOTE(Realistbear @ Mar 24 2007, 08:50 AM) [snapback]587307[/snapback]
In a Victor Meldrew voice: "Yerrrzzzzzzzzz."
The attitude here is that our troops deserve to be captured as the occupation in Iraq and the overthrow of poor 'old Saddam who never meant to do anyone any harm and was really just a good father to 2 fine upstanding sons was illegal. Nothing like supporting the troops when the chips are down.
Obviously, this is not really the forum to discuss these kind of questions. Just a brief response from someone with possibly
a slightly different opinion:
(1) If the world wants Iraq to persist as a state, the present situation shows, that it would be best to bring back Saddam,
because only a dictator was able to surpress the controversies of the different interest groups we are seeing now.
To avoid what has happened, Iraq should have been split into three parts (Sunni, Shia, Kurd) right after the invasion. But guess
who was responsible for this artificial state first place, like many others, e.g. in Africa, where a lot of blood is shed till today.
(2) The no-show in North Korea sort of shows, this was not about bad Saddam (who was for large parts of his political life fostered by
the US).
(3) Why is the US so afraid of pain (e.g. by higher oil prices or a recession). I am so sure it is exactly this US who would cope best
with inventing the technology and resources needed to come over an conventional energy shortage or economic downturn. It's all
about politicians who fear elections.
EDIT: typos