Tyler Durden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > "As the Iraqis themselves said, and I paraphrase (because the quote is not > handy): "If the U.S. says they know the locations of secret weapons > projects, of underground bunkers, etc., why don't they simply give the > locations to the U.N. weapons inspectors who can then go to those sites?" > > Come on now! The Iraqis should have proven that they DON'T have any nukular > weapons. They were unable to prove that they don't have any WMDs, so now > it's their fault they're getting invaded.
Prove to me that you don't have a pet alligator. Come on, I want you to prove it. No, I don't think the abscence of food, a tank, dirt, and other alligator-related paraphenalia is good enough. You can't just say that you don't have one, and let me in to your home. You have /another/ home, where you're keeping the alligator. Actually, the very fact that your apartment is clean means absolutely nothing. Where is your alligator? (Yes, I'm taking this overboard. But it's a very similar argument to what the U.S. pulled.) That aside, riddle me this: If Iraq does indeed have WMDs, where are they? Why aren't they using them? They're about to be slaughtered by the beloved U.S., so why aren't they defending themselves? What do they gain by not using the weapons they're supposedly hiding?
