Monday, October 25, 2010

On allies and enemies

A Leftist Lady accused me of rewriting history in my previous note because I referred to Saddam Hussein as an enemy. She reminded me that we backed Saddam Hussein during the Iraq/Iran war.

The first inference I must draw from her accusation is that if a nation was an ally in 1989 it couldn't be an enemy in 1991. It is not hard to find examples that contradict that strange belief. For example, Hitler and Stalin were allies until Hitler sent his armies against the USSR. And of course, Britain and France were enemies and allies with the U.S. during different times in history.

Also, she implies that Liberal Democracies may not change their polices whenever they change Chief Executives, but this is clearly not true. Ronald Reagan could theoretically have loved Saddam Hussein (which he didn't), and that wouldn't have prevented George Bush Sr. from hating him; which he apparently did.

Also, she implies that nations that the U.S. treated favorably during the Cold War must continue to be treated favorably regardless of their subsequent actions. This is also not true. By attacking Kuwait, Saddam Hussein went against US policies.

The focus in my previous note was on the European nations that opposed the US when it was confronting Saddam Hussein's Iraq. Iraq was an enemy of the US at that time and France, Germany and one or two other European nations were supporting Iraq rather than the US. Livy reported that the Latin's and Hernici sided with Rome's enemies after Rome had been invaded by Gaul and was thought to be weak. France, Germany and some others sided with America's enemy, Iraq during the resumption of that war, not perhaps because they thought the U.S. weak, but because they thought they could keep the US from taking action against Iraq by stalling them in the UN.

No comments: