Quote:
Originally Posted by HotHotHeat
I'm honestly surprised you're drawing parallels between the two wars. The circumstances and justification are so different. Surely you recognize that?
|
Of course there are differences, as RU ranted earlier.
But here is the salient point I am making whether anyone agrees or not is irrelevant...
The similarities are this..
Long time dictator that has at times been friendly with Western democracies for whatever reasons.
Same dictator who has murdered and plundered his own people for decades as well as committing heinous and aggressive acts against other countries and innocent people.
Both needed to be removed but would never be unless there was help from the outside world, particularly the US/Britain allegiance.
The UN backed removing one but not the other...why? Tell me the difference when the bottom line is that the guy is committing atrocities against people that simply have no way to fight back with any real chance of defeating the guy who controls the military.
If the answer is because the 'reasons" are different, I will respond that "not really". The bottom line is that all these guys in any part of the world should be blasted to kingdom come if the ability to do so exists. This isnt about overthrowing any old government, these guys are not representative of what their people want, are owed and fully deserve.
If it is OK to go after Khadafi for what he has done, and Hussein was doing alot of the same things regardless of the revisionist history mentioned previously, then the ends justify the means in both cases...no?
If the argument is "its a different President now"....then that's laughable. The end result is the same and whether the people of either country is better off afterwards or not, at least it is up to them to decide that. Something that simply could not happen otherwise.