In a message dated 7/3/05 6:50:23 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
No, I can't get over the fact we illegally invaded a sovereign
country under false pretenses, and now claim to be doing it "for
their own good." What hogwash.
Actually it was quite legal, Saddam constantly violated his terms of cease fire dictated to him at the end of the first Gulf war. Hey Saddam had any number of opportunities to prove he didn't have WMDs and it would have prevented an invasion. All he had to do was co-operate with weapons inspectors, not play the shell games, and made a serious effort  to prove to the world he was harmless. He could have begged the weapons inspectors to come in and promise not to interfere and be as much help as possible. but no. But you know if he did that , he would still be there, the weapons inspectors would be gone saying they couldn't find any and people would still be wondering if he had them or not. Sanctions would have been lift because no proof was found that he was a really bad boy and he would be reconstituting his programs very shortly. And he still would have been a threat to the region. <So Rory I take it you don't think Iraq is better off without Saddam?


To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'




YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to