|
I don't know how different your post was from the article you linked to, for I only read what you posted (and I saw no pictures). Your atricle was about the civillian death toll since the american invasion. My article was about the death toll under saddam. I think it is an appropriate rebuttal. But you appear to counter with evidence of american intervention/non-intervention pertaining to other brutal regimes and since there was no action taken in the past we should not have engaged saddam.
This war was presented on the notion of pre-emption because of Saddam's likelyhood of WMDs. Whatever happened to them, everyone saw the same documents, everyone, left, right, clinton to kerry to bush believed he had them. When they're not found he's a liar and the war's unjust - but those last two just aren't true.
There is plenty of justification for ousting saddam, as well as plenty of justification for doing the same with any brutal regime. But because it isn't acted upon every time doesn't mean we should never act upon it.
__________________
"If I am such a genius why am I drunk, lost in the desert, with a bullet in my ass?" -Otto Mannkusser
|