How idiotic is this point of view?

Some will always be afraid, some will always be angry, some will never stop hurting and some will never stop seeking revenge.
In every case though, every one has someone else to blame.

[Iron_Ranger]

Originally posted by Tancred: It is a shame, but that just seems to be what happens... when something goes wrong or someone screws up but you're not sure who, the finger always seems to be pointed at the guy (country) at the top. It happens in business, in families (I blame the parents...) and world politics, perhaps. Human nature again?

True enough, so if people know their doing it, shoudlnt they at least try and stop doing it?

Beside, the human nature point isnt very accurate, I mean people do lots of things that are contridictary to human nature,after all.

[Djinn Raffo]

Saddam Hussein is evil..but:

Who bankrolled, equipped, and trained the Iraqis in an attempt to destabilize post-Revolutionary Iran during Iran-Iraq's war where Saddam used chemical weapons and all that and was more or less responsible for 1.5 million deaths?

[Kaltia]

In response to this topic title: iron_Ranger, this is just that: a point of view. Everyone is entitled to their own points of view and Neo-Nazism involves subdueing those POV and not letting individuals think individual thoughts.

Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: Saddam Hussein is evil..but: Who bankrolled, equipped, and trained the Iraqis in an attempt to destabilize post-Revolutionary Iran during Iran-Iraq's war where Saddam used chemical weapons and all that and was more or less responsible for 1.5 million deaths?

I do believe it was the good old US of A. Pitty that even with all our technology and money we can't see the future. I suppose no one else has ever goofed either. Of course we could have just gone on a Jag of massive imperialism and taken the territory for our own.

I think you are wrong with the one thing though, about destabilization of post revolutionary Iran. What the goal was, was to stabilize the middle east, so as to not interrupt a vital natural resource to our markets....and to all of europe too.

Jimmy Carter was/is a very religious man, he actually believes in the principles of christianity and was trying to apply them to the middle east when he "CAUSED" the revolution in Iran by denying aid to the Shaw over the principle of human rights and how he treated his people. No one planned for Saddam to be a madman who would use chemical and biological agents against others. And while we are on this topic...How come the UN, Europe and Asia didn't bother to do anything about his use of these illegal weapons of mass destruction against Iran?

[ 09-12-2002, 02:21 PM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Originally posted by Kaltia: In response to this topic title: iron_Ranger, this is just that: a point of view. Everyone is entitled to their own points of view and Neo-Nazism involves subdueing those POV and not letting individuals think individual thoughts.

Quite right Kaltia. I disagree with many views and ideas on here, but I really wouldnt want to be responsible for not allowing those different opinons to be expressed...no matter how much I love to debate them or try to pick them apart [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Thoran]

Originally posted by Djinn Raffo: Saddam Hussein is evil..but: Who bankrolled, equipped, and trained the Iraqis in an attempt to destabilize post-Revolutionary Iran during Iran-Iraq's war where Saddam used chemical weapons and all that and was more or less responsible for 1.5 million deaths?

Well I think you get the prize for oversimplification of a VERY complex issue. Even if it was as simple as the US supporting Iraq to get at Iran, the US didn't have ANYTHING to do with the Iran/Iraq war. You must be one of the gang that thinks it's ok to blame car makers when someone drinks and drives and kills someone eh? No need for personal or national responsibility these days... because we can always blame someone else.

The cold war was still in full swing in those days, there were a myriad of other issues in play... and Iran was our ENEMY. Perhaps we should have simply allowed Iran to run roughshod over the whole of the Middle East... that certainly would have resulted in fewer casualties... RIGHT? Perhaps we should have let the Soviets do whatever they wanted in the region and stayed out of it... that would have save MANY lives... RIGHT?

You're making a broad generalization and using a fraction of the supporting data to justify it, barely scratching the surface of the issues that affected actions and reactions during those events.

[ 09-12-2002, 02:50 PM: Message edited by: Thoran ]

[Kaltia]

Originally posted by MagiK: quote: Originally posted by Kaltia: In response to this topic title: iron_Ranger, this is just that: a point of view. Everyone is entitled to their own points of view and Neo-Nazism involves subdueing those POV and not letting individuals think individual thoughts.

Quite right Kaltia. I disagree with many views and ideas on here, but I really wouldnt want to be responsible for not allowing those different opinons to be expressed...no matter how much I love to debate them or try to pick them apart [img]smile.gif[/img] [/QUOTE]Wow, we're actually agreeing this time instead of deliberatly misinterperating each other?
Achievemant!

[Dreamer128]

A country which has been under attack can respond by
loving your neighbor like you'd like to be loved yourself.
President Bush -- Atlanta, Georgia, June 17, 2002

[Djinn Raffo]

Originally posted by Thoran: Well I think you get the prize for oversimplification of a VERY complex issue. Even if it was as simple as the US supporting Iraq to get at Iran, the US didn't have ANYTHING to do with the Iran/Iraq war. You must be one of the gang that thinks it's ok to blame car makers when someone drinks and drives and kills someone eh? No need for personal or national responsibility these days... because we can always blame someone else. The cold war was still in full swing in those days, there were a myriad of other issues in play... and Iran was our ENEMY. Perhaps we should have simply allowed Iran to run roughshod over the whole of the Middle East... that certainly would have resulted in fewer casualties... RIGHT? Perhaps we should have let the Soviets do whatever they wanted in the region and stayed out of it... that would have save MANY lives... RIGHT? So many armchair Diplomats... so little time.

No need for flames Thoran... I am all for National Responsiblility and i think that Saddam should be taken down. But I also think that National Responsibility would include some kind of acknowledgement from those governments that helped to create his regime.. If you had a hand in creating the mess...you should have a hand in cleaning it up. Thats why i do approve of USA's current stance on Iraq. I'm not looking to blame the US for the problems over there...Obviously Hussein is the evil one here.

Iran wasnt running roughshod over the whole middle east..it was Iraq that started that war in an attempt to capture most of the persian gulf but he met greater resistance from the Iranians than anticipated.

EDIT> i said originally that Iraq started the war to capture the whole persian gulf...where i meant mainly the eastern side of it.

[ 09-12-2002, 02:59 PM: Message edited by: Djinn Raffo ]