Well, I read a book on the topic that convinced me, anyway. Can't think of the title just now but I will post it when I remember.
On your how does Bush benefit question, try these. The rhetoric on the one is a bit much but the facts themselves seem well-researched. The other one relates to Bush senior but I think what benefits the father probably benefits the son... http://www.baltech.org/lederman/bush-axis-oil-2-11-02.html http://www.deoxy.org/wc/warcrim2.htm Dana Lon Lentz writes: > The US has never given the Iraqis weapons. Complicity in their acqusition? > Perhaps. > > It's my opinion that we should have acted against him at that time. > But we didn't. We acted too late once already. And we should never do > it again. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Dana Tierney [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2003 3:49 PM > To: CF-Community > Subject: Re: Bush decided to "take out Saddam" in March > > > I think we should not have GIVEN him the weapons in the first place. As for > standing by while he kills his own people, we already did; he was our guy > against Iran at the time. > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
