No.1598969
>>1598968I was in the hospital recently man leave me alone, you have no idea how bad it is being there for 15 hours and seeing people suffer, need emergency surgery or go schizo and try to fight security
No.1598971
Bro what the fuck is going on here
No.1598973
>>1598969>leave me alonethen stop lying about my positions and quit having a sook when you get called out on it.
>you have no idea how bad it is being there for 15 hours and seeing people suffer, need emergency surgery or go schizo and try to fight securityThat's rough, but that doesn't give you the right to be a wanker.
perhaps you should take your meds to calm yourself No.1599006
>>1598973I’m not lying about your positions bitch you specifically said Fidel was CIA, like you glow dude I don’t know what to tell you.
No.1599034
sex
No.1599182
>>1599006>you specifically said Fidel was CIAno i didn't.
>like you glow dudemeds [2]
other ypg anon who replied to you isnt me btw No.1599368
>castro was funded by cia
>because a few members of his movement received some fund from them when they hoped they could coopt the coming insurrection against their client state
>no indication he even knew about it
No.1599479
>>1599368Tbqh if Castro really did cuck the CIA that would make him even more based in my book.
No.1599483
>>1598942>post a meme abt castro finessin the CIA<clearly this man is saying castro is CIA backedlmao the reading comprehension is GONE
No.1599561
>>1597315>Saddam's Iraq was a socialist workers' statethe poverty of AES right here
>>1597320>China supporting both sidesDeng chads never lose 👌
No.1599626
>>1598230> His dad was a member of Iraq's communist party which was heavily repressed by Saddam.unless of course he's always been lying and he's just a 2nd gen muslim american living in secondthought's basement
No.1599633
>>1597320>Iranian kurds on the side of Iraq>Iraqi kurds on the side of Iran>China on both sides>North Korea on the same side as Israel and burgerstan>Both Germanies on one side>Yugoslavia and USSR on one side>France and Britain on opposite sides from USExtremely goofy conflict
No.1600350
So, the usual narrative perpetuated by both the Western and Arabic mainstream media goes something like this: the United States is responsible for all the woes Iraq is suffering from today. Although this understandable when it comes from a Western media source (you break it, you buy it), this focus smells fishy when it comes from the other side of globe.
Why does it smell fishy? Well, because it overlooks three blatantly obvious things. First, that Saddam is the sole responsible for everything before the invasion, most importantly, two disastrous wars of choice. Second, that Saddam could have prevented the invasion had he stepped down. And finally, that Saddam is also partially responsible for what happened after the invasion.
The last point is crucial, since many people tend to ignore the connection between the state of Iraq after 2003 and everything the regime did over the years. Throughout his stay in power, Saddam capitalized on the sectarian divide to his own advantage. Additionally, the oppression produced by his forces was one of the contributing factors behind the violent and extremist atmosphere that dominated Iraq post 2003.
Therefore, by focusing merely on the US, it overlooks the one of the main reason behind many of the troubles of the Middle East: Madmen in power. Worse, it led numerous people to reach the conclusion that shouldn't be meddled with. Instead, the conclusion I came to is starkly different. If anything, the Iraq War should teaches us that Arab dictators are just ticking time bombs; the longer they stay, the worse the outcome. Whenever the Iraq war is brought up, the discussion should revolves instead at how could have Iraq avoided having an unhinged and paranoid dictator in power in the first place, and how could have Saddam been removed from power earlier.
No.1600364
>>1600350But the West supported Saddam for decades though? Sure tyrannical dictators are bad but the question is whether a self-interested western intervention would lead to a better outcome (usually no)
No.1600386
>>1600374>muh democracylmao, the west is wildly undemocratic, kowtowing to the regime change lobby and giving credence to their concern trolling is just giving them extra ammo.
No.1600388
>>1600386I know the West is wildly undemocratic, does it mean I should start simping for Saddam instead, who repressed communists?
The whole point is that most of you here who retreat into this anti-imperialist posture doesn't have any program, any idea to propose beyond kneejerk anti-Americanism. You don't give a shit about workers, you just want to cheer on Big Men like a football supporter.
No.1600411
>>1600388Obviously the OP of this topic is an idiot, probably a troll, Saddam was a piece of trash and he deserved to be hung. But the people of Iraq didn't deserve the suffering that was inflicted on them by the western coalition and the power vacuum which continues to this day.
Do you really think it matters if an American communist says 'we support the Iraqi workers in toppling Saddam' in 2003? He has no control over that, he at least lives in America and can say 'this government's policy is criminal and murderous' with some credibility. Obviously the left wasn't strong enough to stop the Iraq war but at least they provided some kind of alternate narrative to the jingoism of the time. 'We should support the Iraqi workers in toppling Saddam' (as far as I know no such movement existed) would just be confusing the message.
The only response to western imperialism should be 'hell no', any compromise on that position just gives them credence as I said.
No.1600422
>>1600411 (cont.)
Also, this entire thing is based on a false premise anyway, I don't think the mainstream counter-narrative in 2003 was 'we shouldn't overthrow Saddam, because he's such a great guy actually', it was that US adventurism would just make things worse, and oh look, that's exactly what happened.
I watched a Channel 4 dispatches show in 2006 about how America stole billions of dollars from Iraq and gave it to Republican donors to set up fake contracting companies to provide services. Babies were dying in the hospital because the doctors didn't have basic medical supplies, this from a country that had some of the best healthcare in the Middle-East under Saddam.
No.1600432
>>1599182>other ypg anonwhat, we have a rojavan insurgency on the board now? we had zero last week.
>>1599479 this
No.1600469
>>1600411>But the people of Iraq didn't deserve the suffering that was inflicted on them by the western coalition and the power vacuum which continues to this day.No one in this thread is arguing for this.
No.1600501
>>1597309>Baathism is just fascism with Arab characteristicsWell no wonder /leftypol/ loves it so much
No.1600620
>>1600613it's literally as simple as "Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye. "
No.1600630
>>1600613>NOOOOO IF YOU DON'T SIMP FOR SADDAM UR BADNo one here is arguing that the Iraq war was good, justified or anything. See this anon here
>>1600469The main topic of this thread is whether Saddam himself ought to be "admired"- and the answer is no. You can hate Saddam for being a CIA plant and a vehement anti-communist while also pointing out that the Iraq war was unjustified as was them ousting Saddam Hussein on bullshit charges of WMD and kiling thousands of innocent people.
>but ur both sideismSo we should just ignore Saddam committing genocide and communist repression and having a hand in a CIA backed coup which overthrew the socialist government of Qasim?
>But the USA- did and continues to do that. But why should we therefore "admire" Saddam. Genocide and anti-communist persecution does little to aid the cause- why should we as leftists "take a side" when both seek to eliminate us from the global stage and hinder our progress to world revolution?
No.1600646
>>1599479You guys are retarded, you need to do some serious investigation if your favorite leader was a CIA puppet. Maybe Gonzalo had a point?
No.1600655
>>1600647>You're just a first world aristocrat who doesn't understand the plight of imperialism and colonial dominationAs opposed to an anti-communist dictator who knowingly allied with the CIA and overthrew a government which was resisting imperialism and colonial domination.
>who doesn't understand why the exploited in the third world would look up to a man like SaddamSo we should make excuses for people who look up to ISIS? Spare me the moralist grandstanding
>who stood up to the Yankee empire and was martyred for his devotion to his people.So I suppose we should start sucking off France and lumping upon them endless praise, considering that they didn't get involved in the Iraq war?
go away FOL, you're not fooling anyone No.1600999
>>1600613Anon the invasion already happened, Saddam is gone. I think at this point it's safe to criticize him without emboldening US imperialism, especially since he was a willing collaborator with it for decades.
No.1601000
>>1600646>you need to do some serious investigation if your favorite leader was a CIA puppetHe wasn't though. He took their aid, promptly told them to fuck off, and proceeded to build the most enduring socialist and anti-imperialist state in the Americas.
No.1601077
>>1601000So he was the Saddam of the Americas
No.1601092
>>1600647>You're just a first world aristocrat post wall socket now
No.1601093
>>1601078
ah ha butthole flag
No.1601098
>>1601092>>1601093Do you people really seriously not understand when you sit around waiting for him to post so you can have your epic reply or say 'LOL BUTHOLE!' it only encourages him and you're doing nothing but acting as an accessory in his mission to shit the place up?
If you are so week willed you MUST interact with him at least sage it and report it.
No.1601101
>>1601000>He took their aidgive me a fucking source before accepting that narrative
No.1601403
>>1601077Except he didn't run his country into the ground or attack his neighbours at the request of the state department. Idk where anybody gets this notion that Saddam was some kind of valiant anti-imperialist. He was a major US ally until he outlived his usefulness and they turned on him. Literally the definition of a useful idiot.
No.1601433
>>1601109
FOOLISH ATLANTEAN, IF MY ARGUMENTS ARE BAD THEN WHY DO I KEEP SCREAMING THAT THEY'VE NEVER BEEN DEBUNKED LOUDER AND LOUDER INTO YOUR FACE
No.1601781
>>1601433If by "bowing to western social dogma" you mean upholding the rights of LGBT people, I'm afraid I'll have to diagnose you with a case of severe brain damage.
No.1602161
>>1601866>>1601869absolute braindead behavior
get a hobby
No.1602801
As contrarian as I am to support a man the yanks hated, he was funded by the yanks, and then proceeded to attack Iran and do no help to Tudeh or socialist movements, oppress kurds because of Iraqi nationalism, and getting so bankrupt you invade a neighbor to pay off debts. I would only support Saddam if he actually unite the Middle East against NATO but he harmed any plans to ally with Iran and Saudi Arabia was too deep in burgerstans pocket to get in good touch with Iraq
No.1602813
>>1597761For those, truth flows from the facts, a direct exprience is a building block in gathering a concrete understanding of the issue at hand.
No.1602827
>>1602161<calling out reactionaries is braindead behvariour>>1602813>a direct exprience is a building block in gathering a concrete understanding of the issue at hand.Including the concrete understanding that Saddam Hussein was a CIA plant.
Glad we agree.
on the real listen to the blowback podcast Unique IPs: 28