Quote:
|
If WMD's are so unimportant, why was the idea of iraq as an imminent threat built up so much? Why all of the deception about why we needed to go to war? Why the implied links to al quaeda?
|
To quote the title of this thread, it's this simple: Iraq has WMD, Iraq doesn't hesitate to use them. Being that it was unclear whether or not he did, and made no effort to prove to the world he didn't - he was an imminent threat.
Inspectors hadn't been there since 1998, and to quote President Clinton at that time: ""If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will," said Clinton. "He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction. The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people." I guess noone reacted to this in 1998 because noone believed what the hell Clinton said anyway, but we all know Bush means what he says.
Not to mention 4 years had passed with nothing having been done since Clinton made this statement - do you really think Saddam was of his own volition adhering to UN sanctions, or do you think the situation was becoming more volitile?
One more quote from Muhammad Mansour Shihab Ali, now captured: "Killing is something I did. I killed. This was for the Iraqi intelligence and al Qaeda."
To suggest that the reasons the Bush administration laid out for removing Sadam are at best gross overstatements and at worst bold faced lies I think is nieve (that was more of a general statment and not directed at you in particular filtherton).