My badOriginally posted by -KEN-
>>Please stop being liberal.
lol.
Guys, you're not being fair. He watches the news, so obviously he knows everything ever. Let him speak.
>>With those statements said, how could you say that Saddam did not have the will to create WoMD. <<
Consider that the case for war was made solely on stockpiles of WMD that were likely to be used within minutes to attack London, Jerusalem, and Kuwait. That's pretty much what Blair said in one speech (not verbatim, but the gist of it) and Bush, Powell, and John Howard (the Australian P.M.) was pushing for war on the same grounds.
If humanitarian issues were the reason for the war, we should be invading China as I type this. But China is a very powerful ally to have - it's filthy rich and has a huge labour market. So of course we aren't going to invade them - who cares if, like, they kill people for speaking out against the government.
If WMD were the real issue, why aren't we invading North Korea?
I do not know the real reason for the war, but I do know is that the reasons given were shaking and seemed to change by the minute.
Don't believe all the $$$$ you watch on T.V., read in papers, and in Time magazine.
