Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Coppertop
Wouldn't sending in someone or a team of someones to remove him have been much more effective and less bloody? Would you have supported that action?
|
This is what I was asking for! I just wanted to know an alternative to the war from the people who are against it. I would definitely support this action but that's either a hit or miss. If the team fails then Hussein is aware that the US is trying to capture him. If an invasion begins, a team failing isn't the end of the line, only the end of a single mission. If the single team could get the job done (I hear that it almost happened in 1990) then I'm all for it. If there's a large chance of failure then the tides are turned, however.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Coppertop
So you would support an invasion of North Korea to remove Kim jong Il, who sits high on his throne of plenty while many of his people starve?
Iran? Libya? Cuba? Where is the line drawn and who draws it?
|
Like I said before, the decision was made because Hussein showed an opportune chance of capture. The US <I>was able</I> to invade Iraq and get rid of Hussein. Hussein's power threshold is relatively small compared to the examples you listed. I believe the other examples you listed would be a very bad idea for the US Government to pursue. Hussein is a single dictator with a relatively small amount of power compared to the rest. The other examples are either not under the control of a single dictator or are under the control of a dictator that has a hold on the entire country who has also proven that testing Nuclear Warheads is his favorite Weekend Activity.
-Lasereth