But the world isn't like that

[barbara100 at jps.net]

Jbor wrote:
> Seeing as you've made the Nazi comparison, which isn't really apt in this
> case at all, I'll add that what history (and GR) shows is the way that the
> Allies ignored the threat posed by Hitler for way too long, and the way they
> didn't know or didn't want to know about the mass exterminations going on in
> the German death camps. Saddam's extermination campaigns against the Kurds
> and Assyrians in northern and western Iraq, his imprisonment and murder of
> political opponents, and his persecution of Chaldean and other Christian
> communities, are components of a despotic and genocidal regime every bit as
> deplorable as that of the Nazis. But perhaps the deaths and torture of
> Kurdish and Assyrian people don't matter.

No, those deaths don't matter much to the Western Powers.  Saddam was still our good buddy when all that went down. Here's a little something I read today on just the subject: "Saddam received some mild reprimands; harsh congressional condemnation was considered too extreme by prominent commentators. The Reaganites and Bush 1 continued to welcome the monster as an ally and valued trading partner right through his worst atrocities and well beyond. Bush authorized loan guarantees and sale of advanced technology with clear applications for weapons of mass destruction (WMD) right up to the day of the Kuwait invasion, sometimes overriding congressional efforts to prevent what he was doing. Britain was still authorizing export of military equipment and radioactive materials a few days after the invasion."

I can't take the Bush argument seriously knowing Saddam was just fine so long as he was kissing our Empirical asses. WMD and all. 

And I don't think the Democrats voted their conscience when they voted in favor of the President's resolution. I think they voted to keep their seats. It looks unpatriotic to the duped masses if we don't support our President in a time of war. The Democrat's hands were tied.   

Barbara