"Chad Irby" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"tw" wrote:

I wouldn't dub anyone an "evil imperialist" for taking out Hussein, I
just
find it somewhat galling that we supported him for so long in his
chemical
attacks against his enemies and brutal suppression of his population
when he
was *our* ******* and then chose to knock him off at his most toothless
in
what seems a cynical publicity exercise when OBL couldn't be paraded
through
the streets in chains.

You know, people keep claiming that "supported him for so long" bit,
when all that happened was a short-term information trade during the war
with Iran,

I suspect there was a bit more to it than athat, but that's not the point. I
shouldn't have used the word supported. What I meant was, for 40 years or so
he was just another wog dictator who we didn't care about especially, but
suddenly when he's an easy target it becmes imperative to take him out
because of all the evil freedom-hatin' stuff he does to his population.


along with some sales of a few small helicopters (cancelled
after they started using them for non-civilian purposes) and some
pesticides (yes, really pesticides, not chemical weapons as some have
claimed).

The precursors are often similar.

Meanwhile, France has had a close, truly friendly relationship

I suspect it was based a hell of a lot more on money and oil than
friendship, you know.

with Hussein's Iraq since Day One (30 years worth), and nobody in Europe
seems to care.

That may be because the French haven't been so hypocritical about it.