Interesting article which bears out what I have felt all along, and that was to develop a place in the middle east where the US could put in. and operate out of, permanent bases. I believe that has already been mentioned by other press reports, putting that together with a controlled supply of oil that could make or break the cartel that has had a stranglehold on the US economy for many years.. I know we want to get out of Saudi Arabia, and al-Qa'ida wants us out as well. Our own people stationed there are in constant danger, as well as under cultural constraints. I am not sure they would be under any less danger in Iraq. The administration seems to be willing to expend a few soldiers' lives while they try to bring a peace to a region that has not known peace in generations. The ordeal of trying to select new Iraqi leaders to run the country that will be friendly to the US, but without imposing even more repression, killings, imprisonment, and other immorality, in the name of some kind of religious belief may well prove to be the administration's undoing. Only time will tell, and I am willing to give it that time, I guess. Our country is spread pretty thin in police work, what with garrisons in Kosovo, etc.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Dana Tierney" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Saturday, May 31, 2003 11:43 AM Subject: Re: Those pesky WMD. | I just came across this, which seems to apply. | | http://news.independent.co.uk/low_res/story.jsp?story=410730&host=3&dir=75 | | The publication seems reputable but maybe someone from Britain will let us | know about that -- I am just going by the other stories on the web site. If | true, well, it would not be the first time that an administration lied. The | question is, does it make a difference when you go to war over the lie... | | And perhaps someone can explain the link to me between defeating Saddam and | removing troops from Saudi Arabia. I am not sure I see how the former makes | the latter possible. | | Thanks | Dana | | On Sat, 31 May 2003 08:26:16 -0400, Angel Stewart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | wrote: | | > http://slate.msn.com/id/2083760/ | > | > "a powerful rejoinder comes from Tony Blair, the British prime minister. | > "I have absolutely no doubt at all about the existence of weapons of | > mass destruction," Blair told reporters on Thursday. Asked if it matters | > whether they exist, Blair replied, ***"It matters immensely because the | > basis on which the war was sold to the British House of Commons, to the | > British people, was that Saddam represented a serious threat."*** | > | > It was, of course, sold on that basis to the Congress and to the | > American people, too. | > --------- | > | > I could not have put why the existence of WMD matter, better than Tony | > Blair did in this speech. | > | > -Gel | > | > | ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Signup for the Fusion Authority news alert and keep up with the latest news in ColdFusion and related topics. http://www.fusionauthority.com/signup.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
