“The flag of American forces in Iraq has been lowered in Baghdad, bringing nearly nine years of US military operations in Iraq to a formal end.
The US Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, told troops that the mission had been worth the cost in blood and dollars.” - bbc
ed’s comments beneath the excerpted bbc article,
215.
'Worth the cost in blood and dollars'? Does that include Iraqi blood as well, and the blood of close to half a million children whom died prior to 119 due to u.s. embargoes? (and which Madeline Albright stated was 'worth the price') - and which might have contributed to the 119 retaliatory attacks. Worth the dollars? I'm sure, since it is going to rake in much more.
America. Sheesh.
245.
U.S. interests are served by keeping regions that aren't kow-towing to them unstable. If they don't succeed in installing their puppets, they'd leave them unstable. Either way, America gains. And it is not that their colonial outpost - 'Israel' - isn't serving its function in keeping the Saracens in line either. The Ams just step in whenever more muscle is needed to maintain their hegemony.
256.
For those talking about the genocides that were taking place in Iraq, this was going on since Reagan times. They just needed enough self-interest to go in, and of course, the Kurds were a good justification, in the eyes of the easily -led. And don't forget who put Saddam in power and gave him his chemical weapons. The U.S. creates problems to profit from it later.
ed
0 thoughts:
Post a Comment
The Inquisitive venture is a collaborative one. Let's collaborate.
Ad hominem is fine so long as it is accompanied with an argument, as opposed to being confused for an argument. In the latter case, deletion will follow.