My point is that even if Iraq did have a few WMD's laying around, they were in NO WAY an immediate threat to the US or our interests. That's disputable, but that's what I believe.
In Hatton's analogy, the danger is imminent and very real. That's where it breaks down for me. On Nov 16, 2007 10:33 AM, Bruce Sorge <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You are missing Hatton's point. > > What he is saying is that at the time we did not know 100% that Iraq had > destroyed ALL of their WMD's What we did know at the time was that they > did in fact have them, but we were not 100% sure that they were all > destroyed, and Iraq made no real effort to convince the world otherwise. > His analogy makes perfect sense to me. > > G Money wrote: > > Bad analogy. > > If you call the bombers bluff, and he detonates his bomb, you are dead. > > > > If we call Iraq's bluff.........*poof*. Nothing happens. Nada. Zip. > Zilch. > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Download the latest ColdFusion 8 utilities including Report Builder, plug-ins for Eclipse and Dreamweaver updates. http;//www.adobe.com/cfusion/entitlement/index.cfm?e=labs%5adobecf8%5Fbeta Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:246536 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5
