After Cheerleading for Invasion of Iraq, Tom Friedman Glorifies Saudi Arabia’s War Criminal | WHAT REALLY HAPPENED

After Cheerleading for Invasion of Iraq, Tom Friedman Glorifies Saudi Arabia’s War Criminal

Thomas [Tom] Friedman, the supposedly liberal columnist of the New York Times and the "imperial messenger" of the US establishment, needs no introduction.

This is the same man who was the leading cheerleader for the illegal and criminal invasion of Iraq in 2003 that set the Middle East on the path of bloodshed and destruction. This is the same man who called the invasion of Iraq "the most radical-liberal revolutionary war the US has ever launched." The is the same pundit who, about a month after George W. Bush declared "mission accomplished" – and the mission, destruction of Iraq and the rest of the Middle East, has indeed been accomplished – stated in an interview with Charlie Rose about that war,

"What they [presumably Muslim masses] needed to see was American boys and girls going house to house, from Basra to Baghdad, and basically saying: ‘Which part of this sentence don’t you understand? You don’t think, you know, we care about our open society, you think this bubble fantasy, we’re just gonna to let it grow? Well, Suck. On. This.’ That, Charlie, is what this war is about. We could have hit Saudi Arabia; it was part of that bubble. Could have hit Pakistan. We hit Iraq because we could."

Friedman made this statement after telling Rose that invasion of Iraq was "unquestionably worth doing." But, years later, when he was called the leading cheerleader of invasion of Iraq, his response was that it is "stupid and obnoxious" to call him so.

Webmaster's Commentary: 

Friedman is a presstitute and warmonger of the most despicabler order, which is why he should be ignored, and become irrelevant to any future discussion of American foreign policy.

It therefore is completely logical that he should defend Saudi Prince Salman, the Butcher of Yemen, in his genocide against that country; that is what he is paid to do, defend the indefensible, in order to line the pockets of the Merchants of Death which own him and the NYT.