At 06:02 PM 3/18/2004 -0800 Doug Pensinger wrote:
> He and all the others
> from the administration told America that conquering Iraq was essential
>for winning the war on terror when in fact it really wasn't very important
>at all to take Sadam out.
I have previously posted many reasons why the War on Iraq was compelling.
Among the reasons I did not list were the salutory effects the Iraq war
seems to have had on Libyan and Iranian cooperation with nuclear
inspections, and in particular in inspiring Iranian dissidents to supply
valuable intelligence.
Moreover, a key reason for the war that was made abundantly clear on many,
many, occasions was the idea that *WINNING* the War on Terror will require
bringing the benefits of the free society to the Arab World.... and that
the advent of true freedom in the Arab World should begin in Iraq.
And of course, there is the simple fact that no honest Westerner could
seriously believe on 9/12/2001 that Iraq had *no* chemical or biological
weapons, and *no* nuclear program.
>And no matter how many times someone says "oh, but the U.N. thought there
>were weapons" or "Gee whiz, Clinton though there were weapons", the only
>one that is responsible for insuring that the war was justified in the
>name of the war against terror is the Bush administration.
Its called resolution 1441 Doug. Saddam never complied.
I am glad that you were somehow able to get a tip from the Psychic Friends
Network to somehow be 100% proof positive that Iraq had no biological,
chemical, and nuclear weapons - but the rest of us in the land of reality
who were dealing with *real* intelligence and *real* history weren't
exactly quite so sure. The United Nations Security Council *UNANIMOUSLY*
(and I'd point out that this included France, Russia, China, Germany,
Mexico, and Syria) told Iraq that it had *one*final*opportunity* to _fully_
diclose its WMD programs, as it had been required to do so 1991. Iraq
failed to do so.
Now, I am glad that you and your Psychic Friends some concluded that Iraq's
noncompliance with what the United Nations Security Council unanimously
called its "final opportunity" was all an elaborate ruse by Iraq to hide
the fact that it had gotten rid of these weapons long ago. But frankly,
it is pretty insulting for you to insinuiate that it was somehow illogical
to conclude from this refusal that Iraq did not comply because it had
something to hide - because it had demonstrated stocks of these weapons and
their development programs in the past, and had never identified the final
disposal of these stocks to the world.
You seem to keep dodging this question - why are the above conclusions so
illogical and despicable?
>We was deceived folks. Big time.
A deception requires the intent to make someone believe something you know
not to be true. I am sorry, but every indication is that they firmly
believed in their hearts that Iraq had these weapons. They considered
this belief to be the only logical conclusion of Iraq's actions.
JDG
_______________________________________________________
John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world,
it is God's gift to humanity." - George W. Bush 1/29/03
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
