Quote:
Originally Posted by Excaliber
We have a lot of those around the planet, we can't clean them all up and by itself is no reason to go to war, or invade, or what ever term you want to use for "going into" Iraq. Sniff, sniff, smells like war, sounds like war,,, 
So everyone agreed he had WMD's, well not everyone, but a bunch of people did. Including Colin Powell, until he too discovered the so called "intel" was largely based on speculation, miss leading statements and downright lies.
I'm not saying we shouldn't have gone in, but I AM saying we were seriously miss lead as to the justification! Which causes me RIGHT NOW to question Gen. McChrsytal's assessement of Afghanistan. I'd like to believe, want to believe, but we've been burned before by these kinds of reports. |
You pick out the least significant part of my recount of the actual history. The fact that Saddam was amoral is tiny. The KNOWN FACT that he ABSOLUTELY did have AND USED WMD's is important. It is known that he had C & B, the only question was Atomic. For all politicians alike, WHY would they think he did not have what he claimed to have. Remember in the EARLY 40's, in only a couple of years. We built Atomic bombs when there was no one and no where to search for existing technology, since there was none.
In Saddam's time that PROVED AND TESTED AND USED technology had been around for 50 years. And we know he had 'yellowcake, enough to build a few bombs.
I find it VERY hard to believe that Iran does NOT have a bomb. They know it can be done since it has been done for over 50 years now. They have scientists that they have sent off all over the world to get the best educations available. Pakistan could and did build a bomb. Why so hard to believe that Iran does not have one or that Saddam did not? Not finding it is not proof it didn't exist.