AdamNelson - 12/17/2003 7:50 AM
mwillems - 12/14/2003 11:11 PM
I can assure you he was the same Saddam as today: just as bad then and his people lived in fear - but he suited US interest then so he was a friend. Ask Donald Rumsfeld.
Exactly!!! You made my point for me.
The President of the United States acts in the best interest of ... The United States.
What a revelation. I expect the President to act only in the interest of the United States, or he is guilty of malfeasance or treason. He is not the President of world opinion or of anything *but* the US.
OK, so we once again agree - we both believe (in your case, hope; in my case, fear) that the US acts solely in US interest, on a nationalist basis.
This nationalist basis of running states is in fact something that has cost tens of millions of lives over the last century alone. I was brought up to think we have moved on since those days. Acting solely on the basis of selfish national interest just causes hatred (some may say the September 11 atrocities were a direct result), war, and misery and in the end denies growth and benefit to all. For this reason, many Europeans, having seen first hand what misery nationalism causes, consider it one of the world's greatest evils.
I would perhaps not go quite that far but certainly, just acting in our own interest is unproductive as far as the bigger picture is concerned. Co-operation is better. (Which also is why the United Nations was set up).
Also, going back to Mr Rumsfeld, this means surely there can be no talk of "evil" etc? Supporting an evil dictator when it suits you and then being all indignified 20 years later is just not credible.
Anyway, we agree on something, and that is good.