Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, the sanctions are a result of the invasion. But in their goal of ousting Saddam, they destroyed an entire nation. There are better ways. They were UN sanctions pushed for by the US but many involved spoke out against them during the period and afterwards. Many more are involved in the sanctions process than the ones who decide on the sanctions... I'm not saying that Saddam wasn't bad, but we did more damage to I…
> Congrats, number one stupidest comment I have ever seen on HN. Pointing out facts (which you go on to agree with) is the stupidest comment you've seen on HN? And, you know, "people" speak out against everything so that's not really a valid point -- "unnamed people said UN sanctions against Iraq were a war crime, news at 11..." > Just don't talk about subjects you know nothing about or speak for the Iraqi people you…
My apologies for the misunderstanding, I was referring to the original comment in which the US was the savior of the Iraqi people.
>And, you know, "people" speak out against everything so that's not really a valid point -- "unnamed people said UN sanctions against Iraq were a war crime, news at 11..."
This article has some names of notable critics, searchable as well.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2003/07/27/magazine/were-sanction...
>I was just talking about my personal experience dealing with the good people of Iraq during and after the second invasion
You are an American, perhaps ex military? My only explanation for this is that the people who talk to you on the subject are self selecting, giving you a biased view of the situation. I can certainly say that what you propose is a narrative that even some of the most ardent war hawks from the bush era wouldn't claim.
It's not a pointless discussion to me. It can be useful to someone reading this thread in the future to have different viewpoints and decide who they agree with.