Comment by dralley
2 days ago
I accept US responsibility for a great many of the civilian deaths caused in Vietnam. I don't accept US responsibility for Islamists of different varieties blowing up each other's markets and places of worship with weapons provided by Iran and Syria.
So you don't accept the fact that a lot of this sectarian violence flared after the toppling of Saddam, which was because of the US? And how many of the deaths do you attribute to the sectarian violence, as opposed to the direct actions of the US in the region?
The VAST majority of the deaths were from sectarian violence.
That was caused by a power vacuum and US's intentional act to oust the Ba'ath Party, remove all control from a country and it will fall to chaos especially when blood feuds are involved .
2 replies →
After toppling Saddam Hussein the US took political control in the country and decided who got to decide what. The slaughter that followed was a direct and rather predictable result of this.
Hey, get with the times. Whitewashing jihadis is in vogue these days.
Do you believe the violence would have happened without the US invasion?
Probably not the same violence. But Saddam would have kept genociding the Kurds if he stayed in power. And maybe launched another war against Iran.
So local carnage (which the US happily watched prior, and supports Turkey perpetuating) versus carnage spanning the whole region.
[flagged]
What is your preferred term for individuals and groups whose stated goal is to create a non-pluralistic religious state advantaging specifically their own religious sect, and whose means involves committing public mass killing of civilians along sectarian religious lines?
Religious zelots. There is nothing specifically Islamic in that description.
1 reply →
Republicans?
(come on, it's just a joke. we're still allowed to laugh at jokes, right?)
[flagged]