Support NeoGAF

[lachesis]

Saddam is chubby, so is Kim.
Saddam has curly hair, so has Kim.
Saddam oppressed his people, so has Kim.
Saddam might have had WMD before, and Kim is publically looking and developing nukes.

What makes Saddam so special, and worthy of getting after, instead of Bin Laden, yet alone leaving Kim alone for so many years? Reps say that "Saddam was a threat, and whoever against iraq war is against the idea of removing Saddam". But why isn't pres not doing anything regarding nuclear threat of North Korea, nor on-going dictatorship of many other countries?

Doesn't make sense me, - although I'm not most knowledgeable person in foreign policy - but I just feel bad for our troops who went there and got killed for such vague cause...

I guess Saddam has world 2nd largest oil field, and Kim only has "dirt", and perhaps that's why President is looking away from starving people in North Korea - and I just don't see that's fair in humanitarian cause. The word "democracy and free world" should be banned from his mouth, for the least - because I just find very sickning.

lachesis

 

[Tabris]

China, the upcoming (and probabaly surpassing eventually) world superpower is what makes that situation different.

EDIT - It requires a different way of handling it.

Of course Iraq should have been handled differently also. United States had no right to invade Iraq.

 

[Tabris]

Anyways, the actual reasoning behind why Saddam and not Kim Jong is oil. I was just basing off the assumption that he actually meant to free the people of Iraq, which we know is a lie.

 

[Mugen]

So, like what? The US is actually stealing Iraqs oil? They're drilling it up and bringing it back home?

 

[Tabris]

It's about availability of contracts on the oil. Modern Economic Imperialism.