And, although I'm sure we can agree some of the US's policies torwards Iraq have been morally ghastly (e.g. the sanctions), I cannot see how anyone besides the Cox's and the Furuhashi's of the world can contemplate what Iraq and its neighbors would look like now if the US had never lifted a finger...
*******
Last post - over limit - but I'm intrigued.
I need to have the word "some" explained to me within this context.
As I see it, US foreign policy, expressed via the CIA, was there when Saddam took command.
US foreign policy was there, in the form of technical and political aid during Saddam's reign when all the crimes we now decry were committed.
US foreign policy was there, cheering from the sides, helping in large and small ways, as Saddam launched his disastrous war against Iran.
And, in 1991, when he became an unreliable employee, invading Kuwait, US foreign policy was there with tanks and gunships and fuel air bombs and false promises to the Shias and a decade of "worth it" (per Albright) sanctions.
Now, US foreign policy has arrived, in full force, to rule directly for the benefit, mostly, of a few well connected fellows far, far away from Baghdad.
That some positive events may occur as a result is an accident, not the fruits of design.
This US foreign policy, which, you say has, in "some" ways been "morally ghastly" appears to me have been ghastly in the beginning, ghastly in the middle and ghastly in the end.
What's this "some" about?
DRM
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com