Reply #16: Complicity

[myopic4141]

Will the debate include the Reagan enabling of Hussein to commit the atrocities? I doubt it for, according to Peggy Noonan, referring to a past "geopolitical situation" will not resonate with the people. I remember thinking after hearing her that "this is what defines the difference between those of her ilk and mine". I could not think of a "geopolitical situation" where I would arm someone like Hussein with WMD, then provide target locations on where to use the WMD. To me, it would be like giving Hitler the poison gas, then the address of the Jews to use it on. The argument for the Administration's complicity is strengthened because deliveries continued after Hussein used the WMD as directed. The badness of Hussein is well documented as is the Reagan enabling of Hussein's actions which facilitated this badness. While much will be mentioned on how bad Hussein was, little will be mentioned of the Reagan Administration's complicity or of the fact that last of the great atrocities occurred under Bush I. What will also be ignored is that the US had contained Hussein during the intervening period between Bush I and Bush II. It would be nice if we were to have an honest all inclusive debate on the matter; but, (sigh) that is unlikely.