Among those were countries or states which were already involved in deceitful acts with Saddam. This is what has come to light. The French, Chinese, Russian, Syrians, and others have been complicit in supporting Saddam and contributing to the abuse of the Iraqi people, all while making like they were peace makers. Their hypocrisy has been revealed but you choose to ignore these and live in a fantasy land. -- The Philadelphia Talk Radio Politics and Opinion Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 06:07:48 05/06/03 Tue
Author: William
Author Host/IP: cache-rl02.proxy.aol.com / 152.163.189.98
Subject: Among those were countries or states which were already involved in deceitful acts with Saddam. This is what has come to light. The French, Chinese, Russian, Syrians, and others have been complicit in supporting Saddam and contributing to the abuse of the Iraqi people, all while making like they were peace makers. Their hypocrisy has been revealed but you choose to ignore these and live in a fantasy land.
In reply to: Chris Henry 's message, "It really is pathetic, this demonising of the UN because the Security Council wouldn't support a resolution to go to war with Iraq. Why? Because they didn't believe the evidence on WMD's. That's hardly surprising, since weapons that according to Blair were "45 minutes from being launched", still haven't been found after all this time (and there are no weapons inspectors to blame now). The UN may be "scum", but at least they're not gullible." on 04:40:38 05/06/03 Tue

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> [> Let's talk about support for Saddam Hussein. In a Fantasy Land, long ago, in 1983 and 1984, Iran was our enemy. Iran was fighting Iraq. Therefore Iraq was our friend. Rumsfeld went to Baghdad twice to meet our new friend the President of Iraq, and this led to the resumption of diplomatic relations. -- Chris Henry, 07:46:37 05/06/03 Tue (cache9-2.ruh.isu.net.sa/212.138.47.20)

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> At the same time, the UN (no less) was reporting Iraq's use of chemical weapons against Iran. Our Ambassador at the time to the UN said "�We think that the use of chemical weapons is a very serious matter. We've made that clear in general and particular.� Tut, tut, boys will be boys. The US did not issue a call to arms - how could it, when Rumsfeld was glad-handing it with the Butcher of Baghdad. How about that for hypocrisy? -- Chris Henry, 07:48:00 05/06/03 Tue (cache10-2.ruh.isu.net.sa/212.138.47.29)

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]