|
Anonymous
|
 Re: the iraqi people.  [Re: GazzBut]
#1953920 - 09/26/03 11:38 AM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Not really curious at all. Before he invaded he would more than likely have listened if he had been made aware of the consequences. However once he had invaded there is no way someone like Hussein could be seen to be obeying anyone.
this whole argument you're trying to make is taking the "blame america first" attitude just a tad far, don't you think?
|
 Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: GazzBut]
#1953956 - 09/26/03 12:03 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Does the idea that a government official goes around advising Sovereign nations off her own back without being advised by her government sound ridiculous to anyone??
Yep, that's definately pretty ridiculous. Anyone think Saddam would have invaded if she'd said "Invade Kuwait and we'll take you on"?
Not very likely is it.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Anonymous
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: Xlea321]
#1953961 - 09/26/03 12:07 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
well i guess it is america's fault then after all. 
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: ]
#1953962 - 09/26/03 12:07 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
this whole argument you're trying to make is taking the "blame america first" attitude just a tad far, don't you think?
Not really. For the previous 10 years Bush and Reagan were so close to Saddam it was dubbed "the love affair". They'd given Saddam tremendous support in his war with Iran. What reason did Saddam have to think they'd turn on him?
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: ]
#1953965 - 09/26/03 12:09 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Come on mush, i get that kind of debate out of my 7 year old neice. It's nothing as silly as anyones "fault". Supporting dictators for 10 years and telling them they can invade places isn't generally a good idea. I'm sure you'd agree.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Anonymous
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: Xlea321]
#1953967 - 09/26/03 12:09 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
apparently none, so he went ahead and did something wrong because he thought he could get away with it. it was his decision to do it. the US offered no support whatsoever for the invasion. they merely expressed disinterest. this in no way excuses hussein or implicates the US.
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: ]
#1953971 - 09/26/03 12:11 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
That's kinda what diplomatic language is like mush. Expressing disinterest when you ask someone if they can invade somewhere pretty much means "go ahead".
If they'd meant "No" they'd have made it perfectly obvious.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Anonymous
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: Xlea321]
#1953973 - 09/26/03 12:13 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
no, it doesn't.
"we have no iterest in arab-arab conflicts". this doesn't mean "go ahead". alex, i'm gonna ask my next door neighbor what they think of me jacking a car.
if they say they don't really care either way, can i have yours?
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/26/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: ]
#1953978 - 09/26/03 12:16 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
So what does it mean?
And how can it possibly mean if you invade an arab country we'll kick you out? Surely that means you DO have an interest in arab-arab conflicts?
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Anonymous
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: Xlea321]
#1954001 - 09/26/03 12:27 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
it could mean that we had no interest at the time, but our position changed.
it could mean that gillespie was playing a trick on poor saddam.
it could mean that our position all along was to defend kuwait, but gillespie is just an idiot who doesn't know what she was talking about...
it could mean alot of things. no matter what, it in no way excuses hussein for what he did. unless we actually expressed support for his invasion, he was totally on his own in his decision.
|
 GazzBut
Refraction
Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: ]
#1954714 - 09/26/03 04:41 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
it could mean that we had no interest at the time, but our position changed.
it could mean that gillespie was playing a trick on poor saddam.
it could mean that our position all along was to defend kuwait, but gillespie is just an idiot who doesn't know what she was talking about...
LOL! Gillespie was supposed to face an inquiry about this matter. She didnt. Read into that what you will but you would think that the US would have chosen to make an example of her to stop any other officials who had a penchant for playing practical jokes on people...come on! I mean this wasnt some little mistake, if she was telling lies in the name of the US govt surely she should be punished?
--------------------
Always Smi2le
|
Baby_Hitler
Errorist
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 26,395
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 2 hours, 42 minutes
|
Re: the iraqi people. [Re: GazzBut]
#1955459 - 09/26/03 08:22 PM (18 years, 3 months ago) |
|
|
What were the exact words that Saddam Hussein used when he asked April Gillespie "Hey, we're going to invade Kuwait. Is that cool with you guys?"
--------------------
(•_•)
<) )~ ANTIFA
/ \
\(•_•)
( (> SUPER
/ \
(•_•)
<) )> SOLDIERS
/ \
LET'S GO, DARWIN!
|
GazzBut
Refraction
Registered: 10/15/02
Posts: 4,773
Loc: London UK
Last seen: 2 years, 1 month
|
|
I dont know what the exact words were!
--------------------
Always Smi2le
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Edit 
Reply 
