All Iraq needs is a friend.
I know this is very unprofessional, but I’m going to discuss something I heard on BBC Radio last night without providing a source. I just googled it but I couldn’t find anything… Anyway, sue me. (Please don’t) It was about 6:30 GMT last night - 2:30 AM EST, and this BBC reporter was interviewing the Undersecretary of State (or something) about Iraq, and the U.S. government’s plan to arm Egypt, Israel, and Saudi Arabia in return for their support of Iraq and enmity with Iran (as far as I can tell). After the Undersecretary (or whoever) avoided answering the reporters questions directly, he said something that I thought was hilarious. Although again, I don’t have the actual quote, what he said was, ‘What Iraq really needs now is a friend.” Sure, this point is actually valid in that allies in the area can help to stabilize the country, he made it sound like despite all the violence that occurs in Iraq everyday, all we need to do to fix it is to find Iraq a playmate. Once we do that, Iraq will calm down and play nicely in the sandbox like the rest of the Middle East. Anyways… Probably not a great topic to be my first political post, but there it is.
I’ll do more careful research in the future, honest 
August 1st, 2007 at 3:45 pm
it’s not bad. what i think iraq needs is support, not control. we really screwed things up over there, and to just up and leave would be dangerous, but maybe if we funded them to build, and didn’t try to influence every decision for our own best interests, maybe we could start to stabilize iraq.
August 1st, 2007 at 7:17 pm
Good point. Laissez-faire would probably lessen the danger to soldiers and civilian Americans there as well… I don’t understand how the US government thinks playing puppet-master with the Iraqi government they keep bragging about is going to help anyone.
August 1st, 2007 at 8:19 pm
it helps further U.S. domination of the resources in the middle-east. they dont want peace. if a stable government was made, and it didn’t coincide with our interests, we would overthrow it and back a regime that would go along with what we want. it’s all about control of strategic resources. we backed the shah of iran, when he got out of power, we backed the baathist party and put saddam in power. we trained the guy. then, when he outlived his usefulness, we overthrew him and now we are in there. just my opinion, but if you look at the history of our actions, especially in latin america, it gives you a rough idea of what we are doing, i think.
March 28th, 2008 at 7:23 am
Payday Loans Online…
…