• Blue_Morpho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    popular Tibetan revolutionary party

    If they were popular, they wouldn’t have needed China to invade. China was supporting them just like the US supported revolutionaries that overthrew their governments.

    There were no popular pro-US movements fighting Saddam’s rule

    The Kurds.

    This was purely a strategic invasion to set up military bases and secure oil and resources by making up false claims of WMDs.

    Their are no us military bases in Iraq and all the oil money goes to Iraq.

    • Arelin@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      1 year ago

      If they were popular, they wouldn’t have needed China

      Why wouldn’t commoners in a feudal slave state not want help from a nearby government whose views match their own?

      just like the US supported revolutionaries that overthrew their governments

      The US overthrew democratically elected popular governments, like Mosaddegh’s in Iran, or Salvador Allende’s in Iraq, replacing the latter with a military dictatorship, because their policies benefitted their own countries instead of the US.

      Their are no us military bases in Iraq and all the oil money goes to Iraq.

      …What? There are still military bases in Iraq even now, and the economic dependence on the US that Iraq is now in is exactly what the US wanted/wants. ExxonMobil, Chevron etc. extracting oil for cheap from a war-torn country that doesn’t have a choice; even CNN admits it.