--- In [email protected], [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>  
> In a message dated 10/22/06 6:57:47 P.M. Central Daylight Time,  
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> 
> Dix,
> 
> Let me ask you the same question Tim Russert asked Jim  Talent R-
> Missouri during a debate with his D- Challenger. "If you knew  
then, 
> what you know now about going to war in Iraq, would you still 
have  
> done it" He answered "yes".
> 
> 
> HMMMMMMM. Yes, but differently and maybe not at the same time. 
Saddam had  to 
> go. Had we not gone in, everybody would be second guessing to this 
day  
> whether he had the WMDs or not. 

This is true.

The Duefler report said Saddam was even more  
> dangerous than ever whether he had stock piles or not because he 
had the ability  
> and determination to have them and he had undermined the sanction 
process so  
> badly that they would soon collapse. 

The scuttlebut I heard was that at the last minute Saddam was ready 
to capitulate to any demands to avoid the invasion.  But the mindset 
of the administration was to go in.  They were hell bent on it, and 
were confident, at least the Cheney - Rumsfeld contigent, that it 
would be pretty much a cake walk.  Why they didn't heed GHWB and 
Swartzkopf's warning that deposing the Iraqi Gov't would create 
chaos, I don't know

Just think what he would be doing right 
> now  if his sanction had collapsed, with the price of oil it is 
now and him   
> pumping it at record levels. Iran, one of his mortal enemies, 
building nuclear  
> weapons next door to him. Would he not feel justified in 
reconstituting any  
> WMD's programs he had just as India was justified when Pakistan 
developed the  
> bomb? Yes, Saddam was militarily contained but he was trouble 
waiting to 
> happen.  Being militarily contained was all the more reason for 
him to support 
> groups  like Hamas or Heezbullah with Syria. Iranian rockets and 
missiles smuggled 
>  through Syria with the possibility of Iraqi nerve gas on them. 
That would 
> have  been a nightmare  this past summer.

Yes, we would have had to rely on extensive diplomacy with the ol 
carrot & stick approach, but I feel the result would have been far 
better.

Enjoy!

lurk
>





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

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
    mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [EMAIL PROTECTED]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
 

Reply via email to