View Single Post
  #34 (permalink)  
Old July 24th, 2007, 10:27 PM
tikilal's Avatar
tikilal tikilal is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 836
Salute!: 0
Saluted 0 Times in 0 Posts
tikilal Is actually quite decenttikilal Is actually quite decent
Default Re: WW2 "Resistance" Vs "Terrorists"?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloniksp View Post
Oh so thats what the Bush administration is doing.... setting up an independent Iraq out of the goodness of their hearts? Let me guess and Halliburton is then there for millions of refugees which have lost everything for this unselfish cause?

Surely you are not that naive.
Are you implying that Bush invaded Iraq to funnel billions of dollars into a company that in which held no vested interest? Did he tell Saddam to destroy all of the oil wells in his own country or did he tell Iran to send weapons there to kill the Iraqi people? Or perhaps Al Qaeda really is under the control of Bush so that Halliburton has continued work in Iraq.

Yeah maybe I am naive enough to believe that the Americans went to Iraq to depose a dictator and stay to ensure a working democratic government.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Stefan View Post
As a final point, consider the speed with which the 'Northern Alliance' went from 'Freedom Fighters' to 'Terrorists.' With this in mind either they suddenly changed their tactics (which they didn't) or we should bite the bullet and admit we haveben supporting terrorists. Interesting to think about.
Maybe I am slow but I can not remember when the Northern Alliance was being called terrorists?
Reply With Quote