We have the most elite armed forces in the world, surely we could have sent
a team or teams into take out Saddam instead of announcing our arrival.
Hmmmm, what a great idea, spare thousands of lives.
Cheney and Halliburton, enough said; how crooked can you get?
WMDs, Resilient, Vigilant, Waver, Regime... Sweeet, the answers to Bush's
Buzz word Foreign Policy Bingo Game! I WIN!!! For my prize, I never want to
hear any of those buzz words again!
TANGORRE FOR PRESIDENT 2008!!!!!
Mike
> Almost. We went into Iraq to oust Saddam /because/ he had
> undeclared weapons of mass destruction. The whole oppression
> of his entire counry came up in side notes, but it was those
> 25,000 liters of anthrax, 38,000 liters of botulinum, 500
> tons of sarin, mustard and VX gas, not to mention that
> completely false "damning" report of Iraqi agents trying to
> buy yellowcake uranium from Niger. Aaaaaand, don't forget
> that as far as the Administration's talking points were
> concerned, Saddam and bin Laden were in cahoots, Iraqi agents
> met with al-Qaeda operatives.
>
> Even with the 9/11 commission saying there was no connection
> between Saddam's regime and Al-Qaeda, Cheney et. al. will not
> ever admit they were wrong and they went to war on what is at
> the minimum inexcusably shoddy intelligence, and at worse,
> deliberately falsified intelligence to bolster the
> Administrations pre-drawn conclusions.
>
> The ends do not justify the means - and Bush's Machiavellian
> march to war can't just be brushed under the rug for the sake
> of letting foreign policy bygones be bygones.
>
> - Jim
>
> Jim Davis wrote:
>
> >The main problem with the moral argument is that it's not
> applied evenly.
> >
> >Yes, Iraq may be better off now, but the moral high-ground
> was not the
> >launching point of the war: there are perhaps dozens of places that
> >have it just as bad or worse and we do little or nothing there.
> >
> >Moral reasoning may make us feel better in the aftermath, but it was
> >never a primary reason for going to war.
> >
> >We didn't go in to free the Iraqi people; we went in to oust
> Saddam.
> >There is a subtle, but important difference there.
> >
> >Jim Davis
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> ________________________________
>
>
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
