keith
Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2016
- Messages
- 490
That is a false, overly simplified perspective. Have you read any pro-american foreign policy books as well as your chomsky fluff? Please get back to me if you do.
Sadam had the 4th largest military in the world prior to the Gulf War. The 4th largest. And he was posed on his southern border prepping an invasion into Saudi Arabia, a semi-western propped govt with ZERO MILITARY ABILITY. They were pleading our state dept to intervene, as their only option was to hire 70,000 security personall as mercenaries (which are reliably less effective than true soldiers). They had almost no armor to speak of, and no airforce, with a handful of anti-air batteries. Israel was ready to send help because the geopolitical reprecussions of a Sadam Hussein takeover of saudi arabia would have been disaterous. It would also be leaving him in the hands of a MAJORITY of the worlds oil supply. Over 50%!!! How you could stand by as that happened?? Noam Chomskey says he would, and that is certified 100% idiotic. Sorry, but the invasion was esstential, and Israel and Saudi Arabia pleaded for us to intervene, and we knew we needed to. And despite all of these un-educated leftists who despise "hate and war" we through our airforce and armor straight at Sadam's military and we won a decisive victory in 4 days, with minimal casualties on our side and zero civillian casualties. We were the only power capable of doing that. What was your problem with desert storm again?
I don't agree in intervention in syria unless it is to fight ISIS.
I'm glad you are here to school us on the benefits of hate and war. What's wonderful world it would be if we just had more of that. How pragmatic!