Quote:
Originally posted by wellard:
quote:
Originally posted by antryg:
The US often becomes the policeman when other countries aren't willing to act. The Gulf War could be seen as the West's desire that Saddamm would not control Kuwait's oil, and possibly use it as blackmail on the international front. MANY western European countries were much more dependent on Kuwatti oil than the US, their economies hurt much more by rising oil prices, yet they didn't help and loudly condemned American imperialism. It was American lives, equipment, and money on the line so the USA was engaged in European-style "imperialsim" that benefited the complainers more than it did the USA. Other countries refused to get involved because they feared terrorist retaliation. They wanted somebody else to do the job for them and then they complained. (9-11 was, at least in part, a terrorist response to the Gulf War.)
|
[img]graemlins/idontagreeatall.gif[/img]
AHHHH so the other troops over in Kuwait from around the world were just peeling potatoes, I seem to recall that the british had more deaths from US than Iraq bullets. Its just this type of thinking that gets up the nose of most other people from around the world Antryg even those that ARE your friends.[/QUOTE]I apologize if my comments made it seem that the US was alone in sending troops to help Kuwait. I knew then as well as now that many countries were involved in the effort. My point was aimed at those countries which did not help, benefitted, and then decried about American imperialsim. If such condemnation was also aimed at our "brothers in arms" during the war, I was unaware of it. It seems just as unfair to blame Great Britian or other Commonwealth countries as it does the USA. I did not mean to imply otherwise. In an attempt to keep from flaming countries that I felt acted in a cowardly and hypocritical manner I inadvertently insulted our friends. Once again I apologize.