Laugh at Liberals

TAKE THE TIME

The author of this comment posted recently on our web site was born and raised in the middle east. Please take the time to read this unique perspective on Bush and America’s position in the world.

TAKE THE TIME
by nima2003@yahoo.com

First of all I am a citizen of Iran. I was born and raised in Iran and the Iran/ Iraq war started when I was four years old and ended when I was twelve. I was in Iran through the intire war and for many years after. All of my male cousins faught in that war, and that means that they saw the weapons that were being used by both sides with their very own eyes. So I can tell you for sure that there was a minimal amount of American weapons given to Iraq by the Arabic countries who then supported Iraq, but the largest amount of weapons used in that war were first of all Russian, then French and then Chinese. The chemical stuff that Saddam used without a doubt were from Germany. Iran used a lot of American weapons, but they were mainly from the stock which was bought by the former Shah regime before the revolution. After that the main suppliers were China and France.

Now that we have clarified these things a bit, I want to add my second point. My second point is that whether or not The US has sold weapons to Saddam or not in some point of modern history is absolutely irrelevent in our judgement on current Iraq war and sertainly has nothing to do with G. Bush! Why?

-First: because the reason that The West (not the US alone) had to support Saddam at that point of time was that the other alternative was to support the rise of the backwards and fanatic Mulla regime which came to power in 1977 which threatened the stability of the whole strategic reagon of the Middle East and it was also a brutal dictatorship which was commiting mass executions and started a bloodbath after the revolution in 1977.
The history have see even more radical allianced than that of West and Saddam in 1980s. US and the whole Free World allied with a brutal and cold-blooded tyrant like Josef Stalin during the WW II to be able to overcome the threat of Nazism and Fscism. Some people (usually liberal in inclination actually) seem to live in some kind of Utopia when it comes to their judgments about geopolitics. Many times in the “real world”a ruler even with the best of intentions has to make alliances with some brutal rulers just to avoid a greater evil.

-Second: Even if we assume that Reagan administration sold weapons to Iraq and by doing that did an immoral thing, you can not assume from this mere fact that the present war with Iraq was not justified. Suppose The US at some point actually sold some weapons to Iraq and by doing so it helped create and strangthen a brutal regiem like Saddam and now the current administartion goes to fight the same monster that was created by their own country’s mistakes. What does this prove against the current war? Nothing at all!
At most one can accuse The US of inconsistancy in its foreign politics, nothing more. Actually if indead The US helped creating the mighty and brutal Saddam regime and made a mess out of that country and made the Iraqy people and the whole Middle East reagon get stuck with that monster called Saddam, doesn’t that indicate that The US has the obligation to clean up after himself to put it bluntly?! I am not suggesting that Saddam came to power and become the monster that he was only because of America’s fault. I personally think that the cold war and late 70s and 80s was a hard time and it was not easy to make decisions about foureign politics in those days and on top of that I mostly hold the European states accountable for letting Saddam become so out of control, and on top of that I must add that the role that France and Germany played in making Saddam who he was and their purely self-serving and materialistic motives have been grosely underminded by American left-wingers.
France and Gremany attacked G.W. Bush for attacking Iraq and most liberal critics of Bush said over and over again that he only did so for money and oil. But nobody paid enough attention to the fact that France and Germany not only sold most of the weapons to Saddam, but also had a lot of companies and cotractors in Saddam’s Iraq and they were receiving a lot of oil discounts and benefit in returne for their support and international advocacy for a tyrannical, brutal, and corrupt regime like Baath. To those liberals who criticize Bush for oil greed I can say it loudly and clearly: if Bush wanted oil he did not have to invade Iraq; he could have simplly entered in a dirty negotiation with that horrible dictator and received all kinds of advantages from him. That brutal dictator was ready to sell off his mother, let alone his country just to hush all of the world and stay a few more days in power. And who would have lost if that would have happened? The people of Iraq who would have been robbed off their natural resourses, national wealth and their freedom all at the same time. So for those who are so childish as to think that you need to invade a country in order to be able expoloit it. that indead you don’t need to. Just keep a brutal dictator in power and then balckmail him every now and then and then receive hush-money from him to cover up his human rights violences and his illegitemacy in the international arena and that’s exactly what Europe namely France and Germany did and President Bush refused to do and that’s why Europeans and the liberal “cooperation and none-violence” fans hate him and cannot forgive him and the majority of the people of the Middle East (with the exception of terrorists and Islamic fundamentalists) admire and respect him.