Says who? Provide evidence of this.Schroeder hid a report from one of his ministries that stated the massive effects of bio weapons that Saddam had the chemicals to produce. A small amount was deadly.
Oh? because he did not bow down to the US, then he suddenly is an America hater and Saddam appeaser?!?Chirac was a Saddam appeaser and an America hater. As Schroeder is. Just look at his history.
Sure I hated Schroeder too, but for his political views, but he was hardly a Saddam appeaser.. of all the things he dealt with as German leader, I think that Saddam was about as important for him as say trade relations with Uganda.
A a bit of rewriting history there I see. The policy of the US, UK, France and Germany was to isolate Saddam and bring his regime down from within and to use Iraq as a stop block against Iran. THAT was the policy of Bush nr 1 and Clinton, and a very wise policy. The UN was nothing but the instrument of the major powers, as it has always been.Both Schroeder and Chirac supported the UN approach of dialogue and searching. We played that game for 12 years.
Oil for Food gave Saddam peanuts. Most of his money came from illegally smuggled oil through Jordan and Turkey.. smuggling the US knew about and did nothing about. It was brought up by the UN on many occasions and the US and UK ignored it (and France and Russia).What did we learn? Why wasn't the dialogue working? The UN was bought off through the Oil for Food scandal. Saddam was getting billions.
As for the Oil for Food. Every single contract had to get approval by the US, UK and others. Even the contracts that the UN flagged as "odd" were given the green light by the approval committee. So as for the UN being "bought" off.. hardly. Was its management not as up to code as it should have been.. sure, but again, Saddam made most of his billions through NON UN controlled illegal smuggling with the full knowledge and approval of the US and UK. Dont listen to people like Norm Coleman and Fox News.. try to actually read the facts and evidence.
The deck was stacked in his favor.. sure if you think so. Country isolated, people starving, military run down, society only held in check with brutal force.. sure was soooo stacked in his favour.He believed, and rightly so, that the deck was stacked in his favor. It was up to 911. After that the world changed.
As for the world changing on 9/11.... not really. The US changed yes, but not the world, since we have been fighting terror in many forms since the 1920s. There was the Jewish terror in the 1920s and 30s, then there was the Nazi terror, then there was the various communist terror during the 1950s and 1960s, then there was the PLO and other Palestinian terror in the 1970s and 1980s, and then the commie Red Army and what not. Not to forget the Corsican terror groups and ETA. Yea, we have nooo experience in Europe (or its colonies/dependants) on terror... none, nada..
Err... lets see.. an islamonazi terrorist hooking up with a rogue nation that is very non religious for the region, treats women relatively nicely (they could vote and join the army after all), or shack up with a rogue nation that is a religous nutjob state, shares the same values and even practices them...yea right.... I would choose the first of course...We saw the potential of a IslamoNazi terrorist hooking up with a rogue nation that hated America. Saddam was right in their yard.
You should actually, since you only jump from one right wing conspiracy theory to another, jumping over the actual facts. Why did you gloss over the fact that the head of the Iraqi WMD program defected to the West and said that the WMD were destroyed? And that documents found later after the war backed him up? Why did you gloss over the fact that the main intelligence source of the US, was an anti-Saddam pro Tehran Iraqi who we later found out totally screwed the US and told lie after lie?Connect the dots.
Saw you as weak? How so? And you dont think that the US actions since Afghanistan in any way embolded the radicals and swelled their ranks?Where did the French-German-Clinton approach get us?
Nowhere. If anything it emboldened terrorists as the saw us as weak.