Rune, Imagine for one minute the USA wasn't interested in dictators
exporting WMD. Imagine for one minute the USA not prudently denying
US aren't interested. As I said: Saddam has been around for more
than 20 years now. Again: Why the sudden rush?
American president to not be black mailed into appeasment. Are you
out of your mind! France, you mean the France that wouldn't exist
without our liberation. Germany, you mean the how soon we forget
Germany that we put in the meat grinder the last time they crossed
us.
Bad comparison. Iraq poses no such risk. At this point in time (and
for quite some time to come) they have no military force to speak
of. Invading Iraq today is like shooting fish in a barrel and it'll
stay that way for decades. Perhaps that's the reason? Iraq makes an
easy target and invading Iraq now (unsupported by UN) will "show
the rest of them" and "send a message".
BTW: Donald Rumsfeld visited Saddam in 1983, at which point Iraq
had used chemical weapons against both soldiers from Iran and
Iraq's own population (the Kurds). It didn't seem to bother mr
Rumsfeld then when he had an excellent opportunity to speak
eye-to-eye with Saddam...
You think because Sadam used chemical weapons on the KUrds we
should say well they used them on the Kurds so I guess we should
let them use them on us to be fair! Are you insane!!
What you call insane was official US policy in the 80s. Some of the
same statesmen were involved back then. I sincerely doubt their
convictions have changed much. Do you?
Statefunded domestic terrorism is a common trait these days and
it's not limited to Iraq, not by a long shot!
As for Iraq using these weapons on "us" -- get real. How would they
manage to do that? The nations Iraq pose a threat to are nations
you guys don't care about (they all pretty much top the "who to
invade next" list). Just let the UN inspectors do their job, and
give it a rest already.
Not to mention that many of US' current allies are just as 'bad' as
Saddam in some (or all) respects. Yet Bush only focus on an old
Name them and give facts for the ottrocities they commit. Oh golly
Israel is committed to an apartheid regime that makes South Africa
of old pale in comparison.
I could mention Turkey, but that would be too easy. (Kurds aren't
too welcome there either, but hopefully you already knew that)
The Pakistan government aren't much to cheer about either. Nobody
dares mentioning them, because that might set off a nuclear war
between Pakistan and India.
How many did I have to mention you said? Should I also mention
Libya in the passing? Or should I not bother with old enemies no
longer in the current news picture? Saudia Arabia aren't all that
keen on democracy either, yet they're good buddies with Bush -- at
the moment anyway.
If Bush wants to clean up these messes -- fine. But that means you
guys will be committing a lot of troops and resources for a long
time to come. Which is fine by me, because that means Bush'
intentions are actually 'good', and not merely about him putting up
a good show to avoid attention on his domestic policy (how's your
economic doing these days btw?). (To Thomas: If it's not about the
election, and if it isn't about the oil, then it has to be to avoid
the attention -- there simply are no good reasons for what Bush is
doing now, might as well face the very real possibility that this
is really about something else -- heck, even "60 Minutes" on CBS
seem to realise that)
