Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cisyouc
Lmao-- the UN inspectors. Right. It was proven that Saddam was capable of making weapons AND that he was harboring terrorists. News flash-- Summits don't kill terrorists. Saddam was intentionally ignoring the UN resolutions. Saddam is not stupid, I believe as others he moved his weapons program WHICH DID EXIST mind you, to Iran.
We know they had a developed weapons program, whether they actually made the weapons we're not sure.
I personally tend to believe the 'Warrior on the biggest horse' (Bin Laden's words) theory. By retaliating in Iraq, in a country that harbored a terrorists and a developed weapons program, we sent a shockwave to the terrorists. I believe if we went into Iran we'd have Saddam delivered to us within 48 hours. The Administration doesnt want to explain it like this for PR reasons. This however is just a theory of mine and is based on no direct facts.
If Kerry is elected President, I recommend Canada :|.
|
Sources, people. Where are you getting all this? "It was proven that Saddam was capable of making weapons AND that he was harboring terrorists." - none of that was proven. Bush said it, yes, but that doesn't mean it was proven because Bush was dead wrong on a lot of issues (minor artillery tubes that could ONLY be used for nuclear crap anyone?)
At any rate, considering the only one who has cited a somewhat credible source in here is mattmeck (which I'm just going to believe because I don't have the time to discredit The Army Times - although I can't imagine a military magazine pumping out primarily negative news about the war) and I'm entirely too lazy to discredit them all, I'm just going to call it here.
No doubt that Saddam was a fucking asshole, but why not go after someone actually dangerous like North Korea?