Oysters and Foie Gras and, By the Way, Saddam Was Hanged
Tom_Dubya, let me make this very simple for you:
In 1991 Saddam Hussein signed a cease fire with the allied forces to stop the war at the time. The two most important terms of this ceasefire were as follows:
1) completely disarm and destroy all chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs and stockpiles.
2) allow verified searches of any facility to confirm the destruction of said weapons.
Still with me? Good.
Now Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. I’ll say it again for you. Nothing at all.
Still with me? Good.
Now as soon Saddam kicked out the weapons inspectors, defied 19 UN resolutions, and restarted the programs in question, the cease fire is null and void.
Which means…that’s right… a state of war thus resumes between the two countries. (Which is probably the reason that Clinton made regime change in Iraq a stated goal of the US Gov’t in ’98.)
My whole problem with using ‘weapons stockpiles’ as a reason for going to war was that it only served to confuse people like you who seem unable to grasp the complex concept that is a ‘cease fire agreement’. There was no other justification needed on a global scale for resuming full hostilities.
Still with me? Good.
Now we can wax philisophic about whether or not we should have gone to war when we did. But the idea that it was somehow ‘illegal’ or ‘unjustified’ is asinine. (I’m not indicating this is your position, I’m just pointing out the obvious).
Post 9/11, the onus was on Saddam and Saddam ALONE to prove beyond any doubt that all the agreed upon terms in the cease fire were being followed.
If your comfortable with him having these active programs (Again, NOT STOCKPILES. I know this confuses the hell out of most liberals but having active programs (which, even the iraq report indicated all were active) was a major violation of the cease fire and more than enough justificastion for all out war)) in a country that was a hostile to the U.S as Iraq, then it’s your decision.
But it’s not outlandish to understand why a good portion of the country would want to dismantle this regime post 9/11.
AGAIN, NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11 ITSELF.
Does that clear things up a bit for you?
