Posted on 04/19/2013 8:19:32 AM PDT by Arthurio
Posted By Daniel Greenfield On April 19, 2013 @ 10:14 am In The Point | 1 Comment
There has been too much sympathy in some circles for Chechen terrorists. After the Beslan Massacre, Time Magazine asked, “Does Russia Share Blame for Beslan?” The London Times reported that the mastermind of the massacre was “is in a state of shock over what happened, but blames the Russians.”
This was Beslan.
“Other survivors told how screaming teenage girls were dragged into rooms adjoining the gymnasium where they were being held and raped by their Chechen captors who chillingly made a video film of their appalling exploits. They said children were forced to drink their own urine and eat the petals off the flowers they had brought their teachers after nearly three days without food or water in the stifling hot gym.
These are the types of savage monsters who could place a bomb next to an 8-year-old boy.
Beslan has come to America and it should be a wake up call. There should be no more sympathy for Chechen terrorists. Or for that matter any Muslim terrorists.
(Excerpt) Read more at frontpagemag.com ...
Thank you for taking the time to post this... thought... or something.
Benign in terms of the threat to the US at that time in 1991. Obviously after the original Desert Storm he was more of a threat. But he invaded Kuwait, and the Saudis at the time feared they would be next. And Kuwait was small potatoes, it was really Saudi Arabia we went to war far.
I’m not really saying anything at all. Beck said it on the radio, I looked at his site, and then wrote a post on what he said.
That’s all there is to it on my end.
I think that is a pretty fair assessment, gator. There was also the principle of the thing, overrunning a “small country” to get out of paying a debt to it. In retrospect, I think letting an insane Hussein have his way with the Royals might have proved entertaining, if we weren’t dependent on the oil.
Meanwhile, here we are over 20 years later, we have the opportunity to undercut/eliminate that dependence by drilling, and instead we get years of hand-wringing indecision from this bunch we have.
Were not the Kuwaitis “Drinking Saddam’s Milkshake” as well?
I pegged that whole "Desert Shield" and "Desert Storm" campaign as a complete fraud once I began reading all the stories of U.S. military personnel who were being ordered to hide any obvious religious symbols such as crosses, medallions, etc. while they were stationed in Saudi Arabia. The U.S. spent billions of dollars to protect the ruling royal family in a country like THAT? And this was to protect them from an Iraqi Ba'athist regime that protected its own Christian population and even included Christians in its leadership (Iraqi foreign minister Tariq Aziz, for example, was a Maronite or Chaldean Christian)?
ROFL.
Yep, 9/11 changed my whole view on our “friends” the Saudis...I learned they know how to “keep their friends close, and their enemies even closer.”
“If you owe somebody $100, he owns you. If you owe somebody $100,000,000 you own him.” I there was a certain amount of that going on. Iraq owed Kuwait quite a lot of money after the Iran/Iraq war, so it was in Kuwait’s best interest to pal up with Hussein. Otherwise, they’d never get their money back. I don’t think they did anyway.
That’s probably another good assessment, I wouldn’t disagree with it. I was pretty displeased with Bush the Elder for putting up with the Saudi’s demanding our compliance on those issues. We didn’t have to be there, and we shouldn’t have tolerated the insults for helping them out. But for the oil, we should have left them to their own devices.
But it’s easy to say that years later, from the comfort of our homes.
I'm saying it here now, from the "comfort of our homes," so to speak. But I was saying the same thing in 1990 .. and I would have been saying the same thing on FreeRepublic back then if FR existed, too.
how many helpless people in Boston, who are now locked inside their homes, wish they had a GUN to protect themselves and their families?
The Bush State Dept gave refugee status to the bombers family, probably through USAID/State Dept., and WHO worked for them....
The guy behind Bush’s amnesty AND this one! He will never have enough radical muslims in this country.
See: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3009500/posts?page=36#36
[snip]Without a doubt, Grover Norquist’s team has infiltrated USAID’s lucrative contract whirl.
In April of 2005, the respected scholar Daniel Pipes asked “Is Grover Norquist an Islamist?” Grover’s November 2004 marriage to the Muslim Samah Alrayyes reveals an insider at USAID in the Bush years. Samah Norquist’s bio is an indictment of Grover Norquist’s designs on USAID contract information. Samah was the Public Affairs Specialist for Arab and Muslim outreach at the Bureau of Legislative and Public Affairs at USAID:
In her position, she works on developing and implementing communications and public affairs planning with regard to various Muslim and Arab outreach issues including USAID activites in Iraq, Afghanistan, Middle and Near East and many parts of the Muslim world where AID is present. This includes serving as a liaison with Muslim and Arab American interest groups to brief them on USAID activities in the developing world and coordination of the Agency’s participation in events, conferences, and discussions designed to educate the publics about American foreign assistance.
Notably, Samah Norquist served on the board of the Islamic Free Enterprise Institute along with Khaled Saffuri. And for those, like Cleta Mitchell, who are willfully blind to the activities of Grover Norquist on the Shariah Compliant front and possible connections with Muslim Brotherhood operations in the tiers of the non-profit industry, it should be noted that a third operative of the Alamoudi stripe has made it big in the world of USAID.
Read more: Family Security Matters http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/detail/the-norquist-cell-operation-groverkhan#ixzz2QvUKhWio
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
There were no "good guys" in the conflicts in Bosnia, Kosovo, in Libya during the overthrow of Quadaffi, nor in the current Syrian civil war. There was plenty of civilian blood on the hands of both sides of these conflicts, as was the case in Chechnya.
Having said that, our government and media has had a tendency to side with the worse of the two sides in each conflict: Muslims against Orthodox Christians in the Balkans, Islamists versus unsavory but secular dictators during "Arab spring" uprisings and civil wars, etc.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.