Quote:
|
Originally Posted by connyosis
Well I guess having travelled all over the world then obviously does not mean you know everything about the world.
50+ WMDs? Where the hell did that figure come from? Last time I checked THERE WAS NONE! The Bush administration even admitted that.
As for Saddam, I am not saying he was a good guy, he was an ass and I think most people will agree on that. People does not want Saddam back into power since he was a shitty leader, ok? The thing is though, you had no reason to go into Iraq, and I'm sorry to have to break this to you, Bush did not enter because he felt that the poor Iraqis needed your help, no matter what he wants you to believe. Diplomacy would have worked, even though Bush tries to convince the world it wouldn't.
Your own president lied to you and you think that's ok? It's a weird world indeed...
|
And you, a student who apparently have not travelled extensively around the world, somehow have a better grasp on the world than I do, a guy with a postgraduate degree, many years in business of a worldwide nature, and literally hundreds of thousands, if not millions of miles of travel "under my belt"?
The 50+ WMDs were reported in the "fine print" of the recently released CIA report. The media is playing up the "no post-1991 WMDs" aspect of it, but is playing down the "a fair number of 1980's vintage WMDs" contained in the same report. You MIGHT want to read a little bit deeper before you start basing your political philosophy on media-reported soundbites.
As for our reasons to go into Iraq, I'd like to remind you of a few minor facts: 1. the 1991 resolution to go into Iraq was still in force. There was a cease-fire in place (you DO understand the difference between a ceasefire and a peace treaty, don't you?), but Iraq had REPEATEDLY violated the conditions of it. 2. You say diplomacy would have worked. 12 years had passed, 18 UNSC resolutions had passed, and Saddam was still non-cooperative. Were we supposed to wait until he died of old age? One of the terms of the ceasefire and earlier UN resolutions was that Saddam was to divest Iraq of ALL WMDS. Pre-1991, post 1991, it didn't matter, he was to get rid of them ALL. So far, 56 pre-1991 WMDs have been found. 3. Iraq INDISPUTABLY committed acts of aggression that qualified as casus belli under the international standard. They sheltered terrorists that killed Americans. They paid people to blow themselves up in Israel. They were, by ANY definition, a rogue nation.
I don't believe that Bush invaded Iraq to help the Iraqi people. He invaded Iraq to kick Saddam's ass, and Saddam deserved it. Once we were in Iraq, however, Bush decided to try and make things better. We could have simply slaughtered the Iraqi military, captured the people we wanted, and then pulled out, with our mission accomplished (which was "get Saddam"). Instead, we tried to do the right thing.