Quote:
|
Originally Posted by host
What else have you got? ....and is there anything that could be presented to you that would lessen your certainty that invading Iraq was a wise, or a justified decsion for president Bush to make?
|
I base my views on my analysis of the situation. What would change my mind is a presentation of a credible plan of action that would secure the oil market in the Middle East and bring stability to the region. A plan that doesn't involve the threatened use and willingness to use the military as some suggest.
Many seem to be arguing points and issues that are different than what I consider important. For example - The record shows Saddaam had no nuclear weapons. I accept that, howerver, I believe he would have instituted a progam, get the weapons and use them. Some some keep arguing the point about him not having the weapons or a program therefore the invasion was not needed. What I am saying is - Saddaam wanted to control the territory and oil in the middle east, invaded countries in the past, defyed UN mandates, and he would have used nuclear weapons when it obtained them.
That situation was unacceptable in my opinion.
The oil for food program shows we did not have him or the situation under control.
Saddamm needed to go.
He was a threat.
Military action was needed.
Acting after the fact would have been much more costly.
I know I am repeating myself, but I bring up the same points because I don't think I have ever recieved direct responses.