Wayne Brady

I know Saddam said publicly he didn't have WMD. He needed to get the UN sanctions lifted. I saying in Saddam's warped mind he came to the conclusion to send out signals contrary to what he was saying to prevent an invasion he knew we had be working on before 9/11. Why throw out the UN inspector time after time? Why use back channels to get equipment from France and German that could be use in a nuclear program (now we know it was used for medical programs)? Why sell oil on the black market (not in the UN's Oil for Food program) and make the money trail disappear? Iraq had no WMD, so why all the cloak & dagger? Washington just chalks it up to Saddam being lunatic. I think he had his reasons.

koЯnut

In the 1960's Cuban Missle crisis Khrushchev mistakenly assumed that the United States would take no action, and when questioned denied that any missiles were being supplied to Cuba

So what if Kennedy dropped it right there? There were suspicions. And with that Kennedy acted on this suspicion. As it turns out he was right and Khrushchev agreed to dismantle and remove all missle's going into Cuba as long as we didn't invade.

I just think that Sadaam's regime was so shady on the deal, President Bush, and others had no choice. First and foremost is the better for our country. If there is a reason for doubt it needs to be dealt with.

I guess what i'm saying is better safe than sorry.

Jimi

However, the suspicions of Iraq were, again, unjustified. In the Cuban missile crisis, threats were actually made, hence the Bay of Pigs. However, in this situation, no threats were made. Just because UN inspectors were thrown out means nothing. They were thrown out because time-after-time, they found nothing, and still insisted on keeping the sanctions up. ANY leader would have been a little less than cooperative. Our president did not allow UN inspectors to come in and inspect the 2000 vote. So what? Yes, this is about WMD, but there was no indication that Iraq DID have these weapons.

Kornut, any number of people I see may be thugs ready to shoot me for $3 in my wallet. I don't pre-empt their attack, thusly beating up innocent people, just because of my suspicions, even if it IS better to be safe than sorry. I'd wait until the pre-emption was necessary.

Juan.©amaney

By then, it'd be too late. Your comparison is a little weak. We waited for Bin Laden and got 911. If I see someone suspisciouly walking around me or my property, I usually ask them wtf they want and or brandish (sp?) a weapon.

I found out a lot of how the government works by working for the government The government is never wrong. Just because none were found, doesn't mean they don't exist.

___________________________________________

Jimi

The government is never wrong, huh? That is something, Juan. I think you're trying to rile me up again!

None were found, no evidence of them was found, no nothing was ever found on these suspected weapons. No one has come forth, nothing.

If you think the government is never wrong, check out the Ruby Ridge fiasco. How about the MOVE organization bombing in Philly, that ended up burning down a large number of houses. The government isn't always wrong, but they're not always right either.

As far as my comparison, it's not weak. I'm not just going to run around beating people because I suspect they MAY have an inkling to rob me. I'd be getting a lot of unecessary assault charges.

koЯnut

I have to applaud a government that takes chances. If the Bush administration would have found the WMD's we would all be praising him and his advisors. But he didn't. So now we all hate him and the decision to take action. I really can't believe he just went in with no suspicion at all. No reason?? There had to be something to trigger worry in the White House.
But all in all we should be relieved none were found. Now there is no question about it.
Hopefully Powell's statement about getting most troops back by the end of the year is true.

Jimi

Hitler took chances. Castro takes chances. Stalin took chances. Good governments don't take chances unless justified. WE can't just go around suspecting people have these weapons, when other countries (North Korea) are threatening us with these weapons. Hussein said from the beginning that they had no weapons, Kim Il-sung, however, has threatened that he would use WMD on us. Why go after a country we suspect with no evidence whatsoever? We never actually feared Iraq, apparently, we do fear Korea. This isn't a country that "takes chances". This is a country that does things to suit its own gain.

Phobos

everyone has their beliefs on this subject, i know i have mine, but these are just simply oppinions...we don't know the facts and most people probably never will...i just know it is just a great tragedy trying to "help" a country, who will never like us or respect what we have tried to accomplish for them...they detest us now, they'll detest us in the future...so basically, i believe, all we are doing is wasting human lives and valuable resources for a lost cause

michaeljohn

this forum does, bye-bye, see ya in 2 days. Read the rules, please.

___________________________________________

Juan.©amaney

I meant exactly what I say. It's the gov't. They do what they want and never admit guilt. thus they are never wrong. Kind of like you Jimi...but less gay.

___________________________________________

psychobilly

click on one of our sponsors! OR REMOVE ADS

It is correct that we dont know the facts and thats the whole problem. Just think about that in itself for a minute. We dont know the facts...now it seems our folks in power didnt know the facts (lots of rats abandoning the ship too). If nothing else we should demand more from our elected leaders.

There are some things we do know though and cant be denied. Such as "oil for aid" and "I'm a war president...I make decisions with war in mind". With that we have found a man that had a nations wealth and an army to keep him hidden. Weve left a man free who has a small following and limited money. This was done under the mask of a nation simply ensuring its safety...now then why is the man [Osama] who attacked us and plans to attack again with chemical or other deadly weapons the one to run free? More people were guarding the oil fields in Iraq than we had looking for the truly guilty. Do you think we had trouble building a coalition because we had good reason to invade? I dont think so. If there was a hint of a reason we would of had the world on our coat tails. I am proud to be one of the people who will voice a distrust in this administration simply to keep the checks and balances. Without checks and balances we have no freedom, look at what happen in the Ukraine. The government thought and expected the population to sit back and not question their last election....much like we dont as a nation want to question the bush administrations motives. Well Ukraine's election was stolen, it was expected people would just think it wouldnt happen. The Ukraine government felt that since the people had trust in them and trust that things would be right that was a good reason to betray. These people were brave and did not just sit and let the powers that be take away their democracy. Checks and balances. Another thing we know as unquestioned fact is that this administration is behind the patriot act. If it was an earlier time in history our nation would be in a revolution over such infringement of civil liberties. Were sitting here and letting this happen...we lack checks and balances, we lack knowledge and most of all we lack a desire to change.



.

koЯnut

Well I can't argue with you about that. North Korea is the biggest threat to this counrty and it seems like it's not a priority to the White House.

joerockhead

These "suspicions" where actually facts, and the info was U-2 Flights over Cuba showing the missile bases, and cargo ships carrying the missiles as the headed fro Cuba.

--

As for the current situation - I base the War on several counts -
Saddam would make threats, and antagonize the USA, Clinton would have an F-15 fly over and drop a little 500lb bomb, or shoot a missile - At a minor target.
Saddam laughed and continued to antagonize the US.

Once GW got into office, Saddam thought he had another presidnet who talked big and did little. OOPS!

as for the Justification - well, our Intellegince was not great, it relied on informants that we thought where good and we did not get enough verification. We also based it on the fact that the UN Inspectores got the run around daily, got banned from facilities they where suposed to inspect, had locations changed the morning of an inspection, and got kicked out.
ALL points of violation of the UN charter. THE UN!! not the US.

Once they got in again, they found that several places they had inspected earlier, where different factories. Yet, they still found traces of certain chemicals that where on the BANNED list.

Did we find what we where looking for? NO.
Will we ver? Probably not.
Are they in Syria? Maybe.

Where we just in going in and taking the country? I would say yes. We are freeing the people from a ruthless dictator who killed people because they where different from him. They wanted more freedoms and share of the pie, and he did not want them to have it.

As for being illegal, well I never thought WAR was legal.

We are searching for Osama, just not in an OVERT manner.

finally - JIMI, I have a friend in Iraq driving HUMVees as escort. He says it is a bit scary in Fallujah, but it is not as bad as the US Media portrays it. He will be glad to get home though. Good luck to your twin, and please tell her THANK you for her serving.

Jimi

No, I'm wrong sometimes.