jbock13 wrote:Purple Haize wrote:And the big point is that the world is a better and safer place with him no longer around.
Not sure how this statement can be validated. For example, Quaddfi (or however you spell it) wasn't a great guy, but he tended to keep terrorists elements out of the country. But now, democracy in the Middle East is ripe for the breeding of extremism. We saw that in Libya, Syria, and the jury is still out on Egypt.
However, you are correct that the genocide of the Kurds makes it very complex.
Muamar (his first name) was a different story. Remember after we went into Iraq he was very eager to turn over his WMD supplies, contacts, etc. He also didnt take pot shots at out our planes after Reagan whereas Sadaam did. He also didnt invade neighbors like Sadaam did to Kuwait and threaten to with Saudi Arabia. He also pretty much kept to his neighborhood. Also, I think the last few years he had a cozy relationship with the CIA and other alphabet agencies. He was a scoundrel but unlike Sadaam he was able to be contained.
I know this is where we differ on foreign policy and that's fine. Until you start talking out your patooty about killing little brown men! I will say that these 'democratic' movements are influenced by force in the likes of Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood who then dismantle the very system that put them in power in the first place. It's why I was a fan of the coup that can't be called a coup in Egypt.
( I was also trying to set a record for how many times I could use the word also in a post)