• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Saddam Hussein, Kim Chong-il, and Ayatollah Khamenei are not evil...

Random Variable

Random Variable

Lifer
they're just misunderstood.
rolleye.gif


 
The first two are bastards, the third is just hardline Islamic fundamentalist... I guess these days that means evil... but only from our prespective...
 


<< the third is just hardline Islamic fundamentalist >>


How many more speeches does he have to give in which he says that Israel should be nuked before he becomes something more than "just a hardline Islamic fundamentalist?"
 


<<

<< the third is just hardline Islamic fundamentalist >>


How many more speeches does he have to give in which he says that Israel should be nuked before he becomes something more than "just a hardline Islamic fundamentalist?" >>


While its certainly not a peaceful thing to say, anyone who knew Sharon before he came to power knew he was going to be the biggest prick in the middle east - and he has, and the US is empowering him. He's the cause of all the animosity.
 


<< While its certainly not a peaceful thing to say, anyone who knew Sharon before he came to power knew he was going to be the biggest prick in the middle east - and he has, and the US is empowering him. He's the cause of all the animosity. >>


I know that you really dislike Israel, so I don't think I want to argue about this with you.
 


<< While its certainly not a peaceful thing to say, anyone who knew Sharon before he came to power knew he was going to be the biggest prick in the middle east - and he has, and the US is empowering him. He's the cause of all the animosity. >>


True, Sharon seems to be a bit of a bastard.

Then again, Arafat appears to be somewhat of a terrorist himself.

So, when you have two jerks in this situation, the result is predictable.
 
I was in Strategy this moring, and here's what was said about the demise of Hussein.

it's not like you'll find Jefferson and Madison in Iraq if you topple Hussein. Even if you do, they'll try to get nuclear weapons too because it's what Iraq needs for security.

They are misunderstood: their aims are to get lots of power for their own states, at the expense of their neighbors. (Hussein and Chong-il this is). Just so happens they use really nasty means to get it.

Just one man's opinion.
 


<<

<< While its certainly not a peaceful thing to say, anyone who knew Sharon before he came to power knew he was going to be the biggest prick in the middle east - and he has, and the US is empowering him. He's the cause of all the animosity. >>


I know that you really dislike Israel, so I don't think I want to argue about this with you. >>

I don't... I respect our support of Isreal. I just don't feel they have a leader capable of peacefully resolving the issues - or even one willing to make satisfactory and respectable concessions. As for the Ayatollah, LOL - you're right - he's not moderate - though there are members of the leadership that are.
 
Sadam was and the Ayatollah (maybe not Ayatollah) were installed by the US as well as many other foreign leaders (i.e. Osama and The taliban)

A little known fact: Saddam asked the US before he did anything militarily. When he asked the US if he could attack Kuait (Because of its massively corrupt government, who were possibly stealing and selling cheap oil) The Us representative replied "We have no policy on Kuait"

The U.S. didn't go in to Liberate Kuait, they went in to protect their oil!


(Did I spell Kuait right?)
 


<<

<< While its certainly not a peaceful thing to say, anyone who knew Sharon before he came to power knew he was going to be the biggest prick in the middle east - and he has, and the US is empowering him. He's the cause of all the animosity. >>


True, Sharon seems to be a bit of a bastard.

Then again, Arafat appears to be somewhat of a terrorist himself.

So, when you have two jerks in this situation, the result is predictable. >>


LOL - of course Arafat is a terrorist. I should qualify my statement - Sharon is the biggest *civilized (read:negotiable)* prick in the middle east - therefore guys like Saddam, Arafat and the Ayatollah aren't included...
 


<< Sadam was and the Ayatollah (maybe not Ayatollah) were installed by the US as well as many other foreign leaders (i.e. Osama and The taliban)

A little known fact: Saddam asked the US before he did anything militarily. When he asked the US if he could attack Kuait (Because of its massively corrupt government, who were possibly stealing and selling cheap oil) The Us representative replied "We have no policy on Kuait"

The U.S. didn't go in to Liberate Kuait, they went in to protect their oil!


(Did I spell Kuait right?) >>



rolleye.gif


Osama is a 'foreign leader installed by the US'?

Saddam requested US permission for he did anything militarily?

As these are facts I am sure they are easily proven. Links?

You seem to know much more about Iraq/Kuwait than most but yet you cannot spell Kuait?

rolleye.gif
 
Hussein wasn't installed by the US. Neither was the Ayatollah. Neither was Bin Laden.

the last thing the US wanted was a radical islamic leader in Iran. In fact, they were supporting the Shah against Mohammad Musaddiq, a more populist leader. Unbeknownst to much of the US state department, the Shah was busy killing religious leaders. The US thought he really had high approval ratings, etc.

So anyway, repressing religion isn't the best idea and it failed miserably; the Ayatollah rebelled. So the irony is that, in fighting a potentially communist Iran, the US created a worse enemy in a fundamentalist Iran. It really, really didn't want to do this.

Hussein wasn't installed by the US either. Our author is confusing "installed by" with "supported by." During the Iran-Iraq war of the eighties, the US was, at various times, supporting both sides of the war to keep the oil flowing.

Bin Laden benefited from US help in fighting against Russia. Neither the Taliban nor Bin Laden were installed by the US either.

I think our author might also be confusing "Saddam" with "North Korea" and "the US" with "Russia" and "the Gulf War" with "the Korean War" because Mao and friends (korean guy's name escapes me) were all taking their orders from Stalin in that war. The US hardly gave the okay to anything Iraq did leading up to the gulf war.

It was, however, in the opinion of almost every political scientist, about oil.
 


<< It was, however, in the opinion of almost every political scientist, about oil. >>


and thus conversely $$...

I think Kim Chong-il, like most Asian dictators... is plain sick in the head. Same goes for his family... like father like son?!
 


<<

<< It was, however, in the opinion of almost every political scientist, about oil. >>


and thus conversely $$...

I think Kim Chong-il, like most Asian dictators... is plain sick in the head. Same goes for his family... like father like son?! >>

As opposed to European dictators, like Hitler, who was completely sane! 😀
 
<<<<Ayatollah Khamenei is actually a moderate.>>
A moderate? What have you been smoking?>>

Clean air. Go ahead and prove he's not a moderate.
 
Ayatollah Khamenei



The first two are bastards, the third is just hardline Islamic fundamentalist... I guess these days that means evil... but only from our prespective...

I won't comment on how utter stupid that is busmaster. You should be dragged around by your nuts for sounding like such a bleeding heart. Luckily, the f*cker is DEAD! And right now, his rear end is being violated by some rather large worms.
 
Sharon before he came to power knew he was going to be the biggest prick in the middle east - and he has, and the US is empowering him. He's the cause of all the animosity.

cough cough MORON cough cough

no sensible, or sane person could take the positions you have taken in this thread, you've sided with the Ayatolla and said that it was all Sharon's fault. I can therefore conculde that you sir are a terrorist. Whether you are or not is up to the FBI to decide, I have forwarded your user name and some links (along with screenshots to avoid edits) to them. It will be up to them to get your IP from Anandtech, track you down, and send you to Camp X-Ray.

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
..
.
.
j/k BTW, though your inital comments are still stupid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top