I can take these apart quickly, too.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
Starting with his invasion of Kuwait. The world requested that he not do that, he did. Defiance.
|
Again with the black and white? The UN may have said no, but the US
gave Saddam permission to invade Kuwait. He was under the false impression that the US was trustworthy. Big mistake.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
When he clearly had no world support and a coalition against him and he was sure to be defeated, he attempts to destroy Kuwaitis oil infrastructure. Defiance.
|
After the US back stabbed Iraq, Saddam realized that the US was trying to weaken Iraq so that the US could move in and steal the oil that Saddam thought he was going to get FROM Kuwait. He was understandably pissed and decided that his back stabbling ally wasn't going to best him. It was a move of ego and desperation, sure, but does that mean he was dangerous in 2003? Of course not. Not even a little.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
When he refused to surrender peacefully, he started lobbing bomb into Isreal in attempt to start WWIII. Defiance.
|
Can you link this?
Do you have anything more recent than 1992, the time I said Saddam was last dangerous?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
When he was subject to weapons inspections and was requested to destroy his nuclear weapons resources, he gave the world a big F.U. Defiance.
|
.... by letting UN weapons inspectors in his country. A few times Saddam "didn't fully cooperate" (which resulted in Desert Fox, on the same day as a huge Lewinsky story was breaking), but allowing them it was a huge act of good faith. The UN was clear before Iraqi Freedom that Iraq had no WMDs. Defiance? No, compliance.