Quote:
|
Originally Posted by host
moosenose !!!......nice to see you.....I've made this offer before. Stop posting your weakly documented "reasons" that it was just and necessary for the U.S. to invade Iraq, and I won't have to post a strongly documented rebuttal.
Abu Nidal?......Please !.....................the last time that I observed a conservative trot out that tired old bogey man was when Ollie North used him as an excuse to deflect accusations that he had illegally accepted the gift of a security fence around his private home,
|
Strongly documented rebuttal? Heh. I'm sure you will "correct" me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't one of your links back up my assertation that Saddam was indeed sheltering Abu Nidal until he finally killed him? The fact that Saddam was sheltering Abu Nidal at all is indisputably casus belli, and it is far from Saddam's only transgression. Your link suggests one alleged reason why Nidal was killed, other published reports say he was killed because he began plotting against Saddam.
As for Saddam not being responsible for 911, well, maybe he shouldn't have been so quick to try to "cash in"...
http://www.webmutants.com/strategypa...the_towers.jpg
Saddam was not a nice man. Your defense and support of his rule is duly noted. "Aid and comfort", "aid and comfort", my "friend"...
Quote:
|
A reader can also observe in the timeline at the above link that other military support was provided by the U.S. to Iran in it's war with Iraq at the same time that the policy of aiding Saddam was justified as a way to counter Iran!
|
So playing two sides against each other to neutralize both is no longer a valid strategy?
I'll avoid quoting Tacitus for you...