TwistofFat said:
]Saddam was always a bad guy. We supported him when he fought Iran because at that time he was fighting a greater menace, Iran. Unlike most liberals, Republicans understand that sometimes you support a bad guy when fighting a worse evil -- just as America did when we supported the horrific Stalin against the more horrific Hitler.
When I first saw this post, I was completely buried with work, but wanted to make sure I came back to address this point.
1) The United States supported Saddam Hussein *before* he fought a limited war with Iran. We supported Saddam Hussein *after* the war with Iran. We even supported Saddam Hussein against a Shi'a uprising after the first Gulf War! Moreover, the war with Iran was never a threat to Iraq's existence, or the total stability of the region. At times, it did threaten the stability of northen gulf oil supplies, at which time we intervened against both nations (and managed to murder hundreds of Iranian civilians in an airliner, but that's a separate topic).
2) Iran was *not* a "greater menace". Iran's government is *more* democratic. If, in fact, Iran was a greater menace, why did a Republican administration engage in a covert operation to sell ARMS to Iran in exchange for the release of hostages?
3) Comparing the Iran-Iraq war to WWII is the worst kind of hyperbole, and reveals the author's (TownHall.com, was it?) poor historical background.
Sometimes one does support "lesser evils" in grand geopoliitics... however, before accusing liberals of misunderstanding this, conservatives should make sure they actually have some knowledge of the history they cite.
