Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
thrakkorzog
Nov 16, 2007

Ardennes posted:

Well isn't there a difference between relative basic ratcheting down of sanctions and selling them tons of military equipment?

By the same token is there any action the US can do beyond going from being "best buddies" to "now we are going to starve you?" Do leftists really want the US to sell its highest tech arms to Iran now to balance everything out?


Were leftists really ever supportive of sanctioning the Iraqi civilian population? I guess I was too young to remember but I didn't hear of Marxists lining up to go after Saddam at all costs.

I wouldn't say they were supportive of Iraqi sanctions.

Probably if you want to get a leftist time capsule of what was going on, you could try watching, "Three Kings," where some American Soldiers go off the reservation during Desert Storm to try to get rich, and ending up helping some Iraqi insurgents fight off Saddam Hussein's soldiers. There's definitely a strong tone that George Bush didn't go far enough, and should have taken out Saddam Hussein when they had the chance, and supported the Iraqi insurgents.

There was a lot of criticism of the embargo on Iraq, but it had the same basic complaints of most embargoes. The people on top still live like kings, the people on the bottom get screwed.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

  • Locked thread