[MD] Intellect battles the [immigrant] barbarians

[Platt Holden]

> Speaking of Platt offering nothing but evasion and distortion....
> Nothing addressed, and everything distorted. Typical and expected.
> 
> Arlo

So are you saying you regret Reagan's policy of preventing Iran from 
taking over Iraq? Your criticism surely indicates that's your stance. 
And while you're at it, what is your policy regarding Iraq today?  

Platt

> At 11:50 AM 11/1/2006, you wrote:
> >Looks like Arlo would prefer to have Iran governing Iraq today instead
> >of a fledgling democracy. By all means, let's surrender to a regime
> >whose stated goal is to wipe Israel off the face of the map.
> >
> >Platt
> >
> >
> > > [Platt to Khaled]
> > > I doubt if Saddam would have gained power renouncing good old
> > > Muhammad.
> > >
> > > [Arlo]
> > > Before I start, I've always wondered why we call Saddam Hussein by
> > > his first name, would we do this if his name was "Joe"? .... "I
> > > doubt if Joe would hav gained power...". But I lifted this from a
> > > comedian, who I forget, but it has made me think about every time I
> > > see someone say "Saddam did...".
> > >
> > > History lesson. Hussein came to power in 1979. That is one year
> > > before Reagan took the presidency. The same year Khomeini took power
> > > from the Shah in Iran. Iran and Iraq, in 1980, began a bloody long
> > > war, between the religious factions in Iran and Hussein's secular
> > > Iraq. From Wikipedia, "During the war, Iraq used chemical weapons
> > > against Iranian forces fighting on the southern front and Kurdish
> > > separatists who were attempting to open up a northern front in Iraq
> > > with the help of Iran.". Wikipedia continues, "Iraq successfully
> > > gained some military and financial aid, as well as diplomatic and
> > > moral support, from the United States, the Soviet Union, and France,
> > > which together feared the prospects of the expansion of
> > > revolutionary Iran's influence in the region."
> > >
> > > In 1983, Ronald Reagan dispatched Donald Rumsfeld to Iraq, with the
> > > Washington Post reporting that the United States "in a shift in
> > > policy, has informed friendly Persian Gulf nations that the defeat
> > > of Iraq in the 3-year-old war with Iran would be 'contrary to U.S.
> > > interests' and has made several moves to prevent that result." In
> > > March of 1984, reports surfaced of Iraq using mustard gas against
> > > Iranian civilizans along the border. Despite world outcry against
> > > the use of chemical weapons The New York Times reported from Baghdad
> > > on March 29, 1984, "American diplomats pronounce themselves
> > > satisfied with relations between Iraq and the United States and
> > > suggest that normal diplomatic ties have been restored in all but
> > > name.""
> > >
> > > The US State Department, in 1984 "pushed through the sale of 45 Bell
> > > 214ST helicopters to Iraq. The helicopters, worth some $200 million,
> > > were originally designed for military purposes." (LA Times) In 1988
> > > evidence surfaced that these same helicopters were used in the
> > > deployment of chemical warefare. The US Senate proposed sanctions
> > > that would have denied Iraq most US technology. "The measure was
> > > killed by the White House."
> > >
> > > A full chronology of the US's involvement with Hussein, an ally we
> > > supported and armed, despite his use of chemical weapons against
> > > civilians and the internal human rights violations occuring within
> > > his own country, is available here.
> > > (http://www.iranchamber.com/history/articles/arming_iraq.php)
> > >
> > > In 1987, during the height of this war, Ronald Reagan began selling
> > > arms to Iranians in exchange for hostages. We begin arming both
> > > sides of a conflict murdering civilians and employing chemical
> > > weapons. Our morality is unshaken. There are no cries from the
> > > "Reagan Republicans" to toss out evil dictators. Indeed, we are
> > > quite happy to deal with them so long as we destabilize the region.
> > > Thousands of people die, but right-wing neocons don't care.
> > >
> > > Yes, I find it always humorous, worthy of a loud guffaw, to watch
> > > the holier-than-thou moral champions of the right now trumpet
> > > themselves as "liberators of the enslaved", when we not only armed
> > > two dictatorial regimes (one secular, one religious), turned away as
> > > thousands and thousands of people were murdered not only in border
> > > wars with our weapons, but in the deployment of chemical weapons at
> > > the very least made possible by tools we sold, but backed Hussein
> > > against world criticism because a destabilized middle east (with no
> > > central or worthy superpower) best served American economic
> > > interests... yes, the grand narrative of "We the Morally Righteous
> > > Liberators Have Saved You" rings not only phony and hollow, but
> > > sadly and pathetically meaningless.
> > >
> > > Of course, we are America The Holy, we can do no wrong, we, in our
> > > ever righteous actions, are superior and above the immoral "others",
> > > and so our solution of "bombs and fear" is the only one possible.
> > > Anyone who suggests otherwise is an "enemy of liberty", a "traitor",
> > > and one of those rat-like liberals, scurrying in the gutters.
> > >
> > >
> > > moq_discuss mailing list
> > > Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> > > http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> > > Archives:
> > > http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> > > http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> >
> >
> >moq_discuss mailing list
> >Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> >http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> >Archives:
> >http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> >http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
> 
> moq_discuss mailing list
> Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
> Archives:
> http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
> http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/