Iraq, again

@Yanny:

Remember that Palestinians are Jordanian citizens that are autonomous.

Then Israel is murdering Jordanian citizens in cold blooded murder, and illegially occupying Jordanian lands.

Palestine is no longer part of Jordan, and has not been part of Jordan since 1967. Israel either needs to give the lands back to Jordan, which it won’t do, or admit the West Bank and Gaza as part of Israel. Palestinian citizens either a) Need to be given the right to vote or b) Cannot be taxed by the Israeli Government. Else, Israel is not a Democracy.

Israel did not follow the Oslo according. They failed to turn Palestinian lands over to Palestinians. They failed to give the Palestinian Authority any funding or power to enforce the law which they were obligated to do.

The PA is unable to Govern Palestine because Israel has destroyed millions of dollars of infrastructure purely to retaliate against terrorists, who have nothing to do with the infrastructure which is being destroyed. Israel has again and again tried to take out leaders of terrorist organizations in public, killing many innocent bistanders. In the US, that would be grounds for a murder charge.

Israel destroying Iraq’s Nuclear reactor in 1981 was not a bad thing. It solved a problem.

Yes, some of the Israeli violence toward Palestinians has been exaggerated. But so has much of the Palestinian violence. For example, you actually believed a few threads back that Palestinian kids learn math via counting dead Israelis. The pure facts are this, more Palestinian innocents die than Israeli innocents.

BTW, you forgot to mention that Sudan still has an illegal slave trade there.

Sudan, after Saudi Arabia, is on my list of nations we need to deal with now, for they harbor terrorism.

I would not have believed it, if I had not seen it in a certain documentary. Israel did give the PA the authority it needed and the funding it needed. Yasser Arafat’s Fatah and PA are direct affiliates and sponsers of the terrorist group the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade. They fund bombs and other weapons for these terrorists.

Israel immediately after the Six Day War asked the Arab nations to negotiate and was willing to return the territories but received the joint Khartoum Conference response which was, “No peace, no negotiation, no recognition”. In the talks with Egypt, Israel was willing to return Sinai to Egypt but the Egyptians refused to take it back. They only wanted Sinai. The Jordanians refused to take back the West Bank. The Jordanians have closed off all their borders with the West Bank to stop the Palestinains from enterring Jordan and even kill the terrorists when they try to escape to Jordan. Queen Rania of Jordan is a Palestinian and even she does not care for them. BTW, the Palestinians are not taxed by the Israeli government.

Notice that all of Israel’s attempt to stop terrorism in the occupied territories are responses to terrorist attacks by the Palestinians. That’s hardly cold blooded murder when you are caught in the cross-fire. Also, Israel announces weapons checks in advance to the Palestinians so they can prepare and the offiical IDF policy is to politely search the houses of Palestinians. Now you might say, “But I saw how they messed up their hosues on CNN (or some other channel)!” Did it ever occur to you that the Palestinians might do that to win public support? The source I used that showed the Palestinain school system was a documentary to show the differences between the children of both sides, and hwo they could live normal lives if giventhe chance.

BTW, I harldy call the Mexican War buying California, Arizona and New Mexico. The Americans under President Polk fought a war for the Mexican possessions to expand Manifest Destiny. Once again, get the facts straight. Spain refuses to allow the Basques to leave and there are people living in Western Sahara. Once again on the issue of California, New Mexico and Arizona: If Israel who captured the West Bank and Gaza in a defensive war must return them or give them independence, then the United States who captured these states in an offensive war must give them independence or return them to Mexico.

I don’t think the Emu God will like this- But I agree totally with him- and I’m not jewish. I think the palestinian question would have been answered long ago if the us would not have set up arafat as a legitamate spokesman for the palestinians. being a terrorist does not make you a statesman. and with better leadership I think the palestinians would have there own state- and a fair chance.

F_ALK- I’m starting to like arguing with you. not even yanni disagrees with me as much as you do. Buddy I’m not a racist. that card gets thrown around whenever someone says anything remotly conservative around here. there is a lot of racial tension going around, which I personally find facinating. but to be racist I’d have to have it out for another group of people based on an attribute that I can easily Identify (race color whatever) and I don’t. however I do hate lazy people. partly because I hate them and partially because I’m jelious. also I do tend to hate people in general- but not for any one attribute.

F_alk- I guess I held the soviets to a different light because that terrorism difectly effected me. notice I could recall it fairly easily. while providing arms to a group that was fighting against a regime we didn’t like seemed more fair. but after discussing it I guess there’s really not much difference.

and back to Iraq-

Yanni - you nearly have my arguments for invasion of Iraq down. but as I am learning - once your mind is made up on a subject- you cannot easily be swayed.
notice you say the “never proven Iraq Al Quaeda” collaberation theory-
the president has said he has info linking saddam to al quaeda, and he plans to release more intell. on this through powell on feb 5th. does he have to compromise his sources and get people killed to show you personally proof? I personally feel that once we go in, we’ll find the weapons we want and the proof you need.

I think the whole debate that the country’s going thru over Iraq is a result of how stupid we really are. for example- had bush not procrastinated and just started bombing Iraq- or even invaded, people may have grumbled but accepted it. but now that it’s been on the tele and the radio for months, people are just tired of seeing it. I personally don’t feel the anti war people are really anti war, they just want it off the tv. they are not used to waiting- they want things right now- and since it’s not a “right now” kind of thing they become opinionated and complain.
I think that if taxes went up to 90% tomarrow- the people here would grumble but get over it. as long as they don’t have time to consider the info they are processing you could do whatever you want to most of these people.
I agree that there are many other targets for human rights violations. but we are not fighting a war for human rights, we are fighting a war against people with the means and motive to do us harm. it doesn’t mean they HAVE, just that they have the means and motive. and if all goes well in Iraq- which it hasn’t so far- I think you will see other targets. no-one said Iraq would be the last.

F_alk- what kind of taxes do you pay there now? I pay somewhere between 36-45% of my income in taxes. it’s hard to say because it is hidden taxes here. no one want’s to raise taxes, but no one seems to want to fend for themselves here either. so to pay for our social programs our government raises taxes in obscure ways on selected groups- small groups so that the majority of people are never affected at any one time- they want to be re elected. I always seem to be in this group. I wouldn’t mind helping others if it was MY choice. but it’s quite another matter when someone takes your money to help some cause they believe in.
when I was about 17 me and my dad were talking about welfare- and I brought up the liberal argument that “if even one person is helped from this program- doesn’t that make it all (the fraud) worth it”? my dad looked at me and said " wait until you start paying taxes- I G** ****** gaurantee that attitude will change" … my daddy was right. when I personally had to pay for all the fraud- I didn’t care anymore about that one struggling family- let them starve- the 1000 other shmoes ruined it for them.
that’s why I believe that if you can’t work- you shouldn’t be allowed to survive. you couldn’t in the jungle, why should you here?? and like I said, I don’t feel this way about children. it’s not there fault their parents are dreggs. I just wish we could take them out of poverty, or abuse and let them enjoy life. and be loved. lord knows it’s not long before the weight of the world takes that away from them.

Oh if that "can’t work Shouldn’t survive thing made you mad - try this:
-If you Don’t Pay Taxes - you shouldn’t have a right to vote - especially on tax increases.
-if you don’t work, you should loose your right to breed.
-if you have children, you should be subject to public beatings for cases of abuse - neglect or stupidity towards your child.- people don’t take anything, much less parenting, seriously.
and before you hit me with the killing handicapped people thing again - that’s not what I mean. look at stephen hawking. most handicapped people want to work. now mental retardation is different- they cannot easily work, but it’s not thier fault. many mildly retarded people do hold mineal jobs. I have no problem helping those who cannot help themselves. I too have compassiosn for the unfortunate, but the many years of toilling for those who would abuse my good will has hardened my heart, so I turn my face from the whole system.
I wasn’t born a right wing devil- the world and all it’s scum made me this way.

oh and F_alk- how could you use gen paulus as an example. he was a trophy. for him to live like he did 90,000 of his troops were murdered by russians. they said it was the cold and typhus but - only 5000 ever made it back to germany- and then only long after the war was over.

Again i’m with Yanny (and F_alk) on this one.
I’m not some high and stupid hippy that equates the use and show of appropriate force with baby killing. The gov’t of a “civilized country” to force its citizens into a war before it has been well thought out, debated, analyzed with all consequences taken into account is acting irresponsibly, however. Also, maybe i’m being a little naive here, but why does the American “diplomatic solution” to everything appear to be “comply or we’ll blow you up”? Why did you not have this response to war when it was really important (1939, say)?
Again, if there is some (any) evidence of current evil acting on the part of Saddam requiring nothing less than the use of force, then ok. If the most he may be accused of is “not telling weapons inspectors about weapons he may or may not have” then i think we might slow down the war machine a little until we have something to blow up a bunch of Iraqui’s over (of course if he has nasty weapons and this can be demonstrated, then by all means go in. If your evidence is solid, and not based on Iranian intelligence, and you need a medic, then give me a call.
And alamein - i think you are living in the wrong country - or maybe i am. The beauty of countries like ours is that we have the liberty to examine the facts, speak our opinions about them, debate them, and act on them. I think you may want to confer with DasEwokSS about this as he appears to be in your camp with regards to your form of social democracy.
And Yanny is absolutely right. a 90% increase in taxes and every gun wielding survivalist from Oklahoma to Montana would storm D.C. Even Canadians are not that socialistic.

@cystic:

If the most he may be accused of is “not telling weapons inspectors about weapons he may or may not have”

i don’t understand why everybody keeps saying this. we KNOW FOR SURE that he was chemical/biological weapons, beacuse he hasn’t shown us that he has gotten rid of them! if he had gotten rid of them, do you think he wouldn’t show us that he got rid of them ?!?! this is pure insanity, we know he has weapons yet we sit back and say “he hasn’t done anything wrong. ever. gassing the kurds was just his way of expressing his feelings. of course he doesn’t have chemical/biolgical weapons, beacuse he’s a nice person” if i were in charge, i would invade ASAP.
some would say “but why attack Iraq and not some other country thats broken all these UN regulations or whatever” beacuse i think Iraq and north Korea (who’s comin next) are the only 2 countries in the world (countries, not “peaceful” arabs who try to blow up buildings and kill thousands of people in the process, but thats okay beacuse they have a “peaceful” religion) that would actually try to attack us with chemical/biological and even nuclear weapons.

"but what about israel? shouldn’t we invade them? haven’t they broken UN
Yanny -Strong - This is your first and only warning. Insulting other members like that will result in a ban.

@StrongBad1988:

@cystic:

If the most he may be accused of is “not telling weapons inspectors about weapons he may or may not have”

i don’t understand why everybody keeps saying this. we KNOW FOR SURE that he was chemical/biological weapons, beacuse he hasn’t shown us that he has gotten rid of them! if he had gotten rid of them, do you think he wouldn’t show us that he got rid of them ?!?! this is pure insanity, we know he has weapons yet we sit back and say “he hasn’t done anything wrong. ever. gassing the kurds was just his way of expressing his feelings. of course he doesn’t have chemical/biolgical weapons, beacuse he’s a nice person” if i were in charge, i would invade ASAP.

this is an inappropriate argument. I remember the Gulf war well, and i was all for going in then - particularly given the propaganda sent us from the daughter of a diplomat regarding Iraqui troops killing babies in hospitals (later much of the propaganda was revealled as being false, however i was still in favor of the war, and even considered enlisting to augment Canada’s contribution). What you have done is taken my arguments and twisted them to make me look ridiculous as tho’ i’ve said something i’ve not. Of course it was wrong of him to gas the Kurds, however what Bush is crying for will not change this. Nor do i believe that “he is a nice person”. What does bother me is the idea of unilateral invasion by one country into another sovereign nation because of politico/economic interests. Until it can be demonstrated otherwise, then i can see a connection between George Jr.'s little play, and the one made by Iraq in attempting to re-annex Kuwait in 1991.

some would say “but why attack Iraq and not some other country thats broken all these UN regulations or whatever” beacuse i think Iraq and north Korea (who’s comin next) are the only 2 countries in the world (countries, not “peaceful” arabs who try to blow up buildings and kill thousands of people in the process, but thats okay beacuse they have a “peaceful” religion) that would actually try to attack us with chemical/biological and even nuclear weapons.

"but what about israel? shouldn’t we invade them? haven’t they broken UN
Yanny -Strong - This is your first and only warning. Insulting other members like that will result in a ban.

Our point is that:

1. Iraq is not connected to el queda, and therefore to attack them because of 9/11 is nonsensical as the real perpetrators come from and are openly supported by other countries.
2. These countries, while openly supporting terrorists are political friends of the US, have wealthy yet dictatorial regimes, oppress women far more than Iraq, and yet are cosied up to.

• that if we are truly attacking evil terrorist regimes, then we appear to be at the door of a minor player in this regard, and if we are attacking evil dictatorial and oppressive regimes, then again we are at the door of a minor player.
  I’d like to see a peacekeeping force in Iraq, however the likelihood of this is virtually non-existant thanks to the U.S.'s antagonistic diplomacy.

(i have not been offended in Strongbad’s posting - with the exception of the more inane ones - i take it there was some editing of this one?)

Erased what who said?

@Yanny:

I would not have believed it, if I had not seen it in a certain documentary. Israel did give the PA the authority it needed and the funding it needed. Yasser Arafat’s Fatah and PA are direct affiliates and sponsers of the terrorist group the Al-Aksa Martyrs Brigade. They fund bombs and other weapons for these terrorists.

And for 5 years, the PA and Israel cooperated and life was good. However, starting with the second uprising (led by Hamas and not Arafat) the Israelis began to destroy everything the PA had managed to achieve over the last 5 years.

They are taxed by the PA, which in it’s current state feeds directly into the hands of the Israeli Government. Tariffs apply to the Palestinians, which also feeds directly to the Israeli Government. So do all tolls. Those are taxes.

Notice that all of Israel’s attempt to stop terrorism in the occupied territories are responses to terrorist attacks by the Palestinians.

Theres a different between stopping terrorism and attacking for revenge. We’ve seen it over the past 5 years, suicide bombers kill 15 Israelis, the Israelis bulldoze 3 blocks of homes in response.

That’s hardly cold blooded murder when you are caught in the cross-fire.

It is cold blooded murder to fire a missle into a residential area, killing 1 terrorist and 26 innocents. It is cold blooded murder to fire a bomb at a car in the street, killing 1 terrorist and almost a dozen people just driving by. In the US, had a commander ordered those attacks, he/she’d be put in jail, possible given the death penalty.

Also, Israel announces weapons checks in advance to the Palestinians so they can prepare and the offiical IDF policy is to politely search the houses of Palestinians. Now you might say, “But I saw how they messed up their hosues on CNN (or some other channel)!”

It was an Israeli news agency, who were tagging along with the IDF soldiers as many agencies do. However, the IDF usually requires that they edit the film to get rid of anything they don’t want in. This video, obtained by CNN, is the only footage ever to come out unedited. They were cruel, and committed warcrimes in that house (looting, destroying private property without cause).

Did it ever occur to you that the Palestinians might do that to win public support?

The only Palestinians involved were getting their house destroyed.

BTW, I harldy call the Mexican War buying California, Arizona and New Mexico. The Americans under President Polk fought a war for the Mexican possessions to expand Manifest Destiny.

We bought New Mexico-California-Arizona from spain, the Mexican war consisted of a border dispute where, and the result was Texas’s border was extended to the Rio Grande river. There was barely a single person living in the arid desert. Mexico agreed to give us this small territory, barely 40 Miles farther south than the borders already were, when we won the war.

The PA did not cooperate with Israel. There were still a few terrorist attacks during the 5 years after the Oslo Accords, but Prime Minister Netanyahu told Arafat that he would be retaliated agaisnt if he would not control the terrorists and at that time Arafat did actually crack down on terrorism and succeded. Might I add he had much less infrastructure than he did today. The IDF does not take out parts of film, once again you have proven your lack of knowledge on the subject. CNN uses unrelated footage and witness accounts from unreliable sources for their information and like what the New York Times did, they take a picture and display it as somethign it really is not. As for firing missiles, many of those hit terorist meetings, thoguh you are right that there are some civilians. But keep in mind that the fighting in the West Bank and Gaza is similar to that in Stalingrad in World War 2. ISrael cannot use pinpoint aerial bombings or modern warfare because that would destroy the area completely.

BTW, the soldiers that do open fire when they are not allowed are court martialled and jailed. The Palestinians that are in the way are well aware in advance that an oepration is taking place, they simply choose to remain outside for martyrdom. They do not oppose terrorism because it works.

The Mexican-War was more than just a border dispute over Texas. The US did not buy those areas, it invaded them and it also invaded Mexico City and Vera Cruz but in the end only took California, New Mexico and Arizona from the Mexicans rather than the whole country as some wanted.

cystic are you calling ME a high and stupid hippie who equates the use and show of force with baby killing?? or are you talking about the president. I’m no hippie (I would have nuked college campuses in the 60’s and sent the unruly youth’s to concentration camps - had any of them survived) but that’s just me. and I’m no baby killer either. i wouldn’t even kill the child of my worst enemy- kids are innocent.
and as far as my political beliefs being extreme- I agree that they are radical. as are yours to me. but that’s what I find so great about this country ( even though you aren’t part of it, the internet places you here) - we can argue, we can vent, we can see that we have irreconcillable differences- respect each other’s opinion (which can’t be swayed) and move on - without having the country erupt into civil war.
YANNI- OH so that’s what happened, I read the kids posting and the warning, and I said to myself - “geez, I dont see anything wrong here- i’ve been calling out commies for two weeks now”. thanks for clearing that up.

@alamein:

cystic are you calling ME a high and stupid hippie who equates the use and show of force with baby killing?? or are you talking about the president. I’m no hippie (I would have nuked college campuses in the 60’s and sent the unruly youth’s to concentration camps - had any of them survived) but that’s just me. and I’m no baby killer either. i wouldn’t even kill the child of my worst enemy- kids are innocent.
and as far as my political beliefs being extreme- I agree that they are radical. as are yours to me. but that’s what I find so great about this country ( even though you aren’t part of it, the internet places you here) - we can argue, we can vent, we can see that we have irreconcillable differences- respect each other’s opinion (which can’t be swayed) and move on - without having the country erupt into civil war.

no no - my point was simply that although i think that it is necessary to approach this issue more rationally, that does not put me on the left side of the political spectrum. I have the necessary brain power to recognise that you are of the war-monger camp with little hippy in you as well. My original point was actually to increase the debate with regards to the following:

I think the whole debate that the country’s going thru over Iraq is a result of how stupid we really are. for example- had bush not procrastinated and just started bombing Iraq- or even invaded, people may have grumbled but accepted it. but now that it’s been on the tele and the radio for months, people are just tired of seeing it. I personally don’t feel the anti war people are really anti war, they just want it off the tv. they are not used to waiting- they want things right now- and since it’s not a “right now” kind of thing they become opinionated and complain.

and i think that if we all chased peace in the way this forum is going, israel would have no state, germany should be given polland (prussia), china should get back tiawan, s. korea should be returned to the north, alaska to the inuits (I know I misspelled it) the south west returned to the apache, mexico to the myans, chille the incans, europe to the early chro magnons, and we should clone the mamoths to restore their population as well.
I personally think, we will attack iraq and uncover all the proof you need. and then your opinions will be swayed in much the same manner as those americans who oppossed WW2. not that you are wrong mind you, some people just look at facts differently. as a veteran I’m already pre disposed towards saddam. it will take less of an argument to convince me. now if we wre going into china- I have many chinese friends- it would take more than the sufferings of the tibetten monks to turn me against them. besides you guys seem to be more inclined towards traditional news outlets for info- CNN MSNBC ABC , I listen to neal boortz, rush and hannity for my news.

OH, I don’t get to watch fox news much, but on the radio last week sean hannity had a guest on that was a former weapons inspector. he was part of the four man decision making team that chose the inspection sites (I wish I could remember his name), he said that on the hannity and colmes show he would bring out more proof that the french government actually compromised the sites by relaying them ahead of time to the Iraqies. to do their job he had to originally developed two lists, one which would be shared ahead of time with the french, and another real inspection site list- just to do his job effectively. and then when that ruse wore off they had to go with three lists, and allow the french attache’ to “find” the second list.
I think he’s supposed to be on this week. and I wouldn’t be suprised to find a simular thing going on now. back then the french did it for a government contract of some sort.
and does anyone remember the germans shipping weapons material to the Iraqies under the pretext of farming equipment??
those are facts, and that’s why I believe the president more than our european “allies”, they have a vested interest in the dictator.

and unfortunately strongbad - no one does seem to care about the khurds. we could have taken out saddam in 91. but to keep that region stable we would have had to keep troops there for years, and invested millions to create a stable western style government that would not be overthrown by fundamentalists the moment we left.
at the time this was not too apealling as our forces were in the process of a massive reduction in strength - to cut the budjet. so the cia decided to incite the khurds to topple saddam, because they hated each other (like osama and saddam and us) saddam’s army was not allowed to use airpower against the khurds- so he merely eradicated their populance with chemical weapons. those who could, fled to turkey. if we had taken action then, you could justify it. but waiting ten years to seek justice seems a bit like lawyering for a fight.

ah cystic you flatter me. :oops:

my point in saying that was that the government has far more information than we do. they should act swiftly and decisively - and in the best interests of the majority. if they did this, regardless of what they do, people would respect this leadership and comply un questionably. but like the jungle- if you act indecisivley or hesitate your enemies can rally and your cause is thwarted. think of a couple lions attacking one of those huge water bison. if they attack, before the herd can organise, they only lament the loss of a herd member. but if the lion is spotted, the herd will not only protect itself - but run off the lions with force.

and we are animals after all.

There are alternatives to firing a missle into a crowd. In the US, its likely the same objective would of been solved with a Helicopter strike, or a raid on foot. Israel is the only “civilized” country in the world which would fire off missles so carelessly. In some cases, they didn’t even have good enough intelligence to hit the right building, resulting in scores of innocent deaths.

I think you’re wrong. It wouldn’t happen in America today because we’re not attacked by terrorists on a daily or weekly basis. But if suicide bombings became a regular occurence in this country, then watch out–becuase Americans would support any measure to take out terrorists. You can’t compare Israel to us in terms of how they’re expected to respond, we’re in entirely different situations.

@alamein:

and i think that if we all chased peace in the way this forum is going, israel would have no state, germany should be given polland (prussia), china should get back tiawan, s. korea should be returned to the north, alaska to the inuits (I know I misspelled it) the south west returned to the apache, mexico to the myans, chille the incans, europe to the early chro magnons, and we should clone the mamoths to restore their population as well.

this is an argument of weakness. If you have no leg to stand on, you make your opponant appear to be legless by twisting their arguments to ridiculous conclusions, except you are augmenting this weakness by invoking the sliding slope fallacy. This is all i have to address your first point.

I personally think, we will attack iraq and uncover all the proof you need. and then your opinions will be swayed in much the same manner as those americans who oppossed WW2. not that you are wrong mind you, some people just look at facts differently. as a veteran I’m already pre disposed towards saddam. it will take less of an argument to convince me. now if we wre going into china- I have many chinese friends- it would take more than the sufferings of the tibetten monks to turn me against them. besides you guys seem to be more inclined towards traditional news outlets for info- CNN MSNBC ABC , I listen to neal boortz, rush and hannity for my news.

ahh yes. The ever vigilent reporting of Rush. I read the NYT, and i am naturally afflicted with the more Canadian perspective of the CBC and its more conservative colleagues at globel as well as CTV.
Personally i’d rather “uncover” the proof without the use of war. Naturally as a non-veteran i would prefer a more peaceful solution?? (Field Marshall - any thoughts here, although i am grossly aware of your take).

OH, I don’t get to watch fox news much, but on the radio last week sean hannity had a guest on that was a former weapons inspector. he was part of the four man decision making team that chose the inspection sites (I wish I could remember his name), he said that on the hannity and colmes show he would bring out more proof that the french government actually compromised the sites by relaying them ahead of time to the Iraqies. to do their job he had to originally developed two lists, one which would be shared ahead of time with the french, and another real inspection site list- just to do his job effectively. and then when that ruse wore off they had to go with three lists, and allow the french attache’ to “find” the second list.

ahhh yes. excellent proof that Saddam is hiding weapons. Time to send in the troops and blast those Iraqui’s to kingdom come. (of course the Iraqui army won’t fight an invasion of thier homeland, as i keep hearing from conservative views that there would be little fighting in a ground invasion, despite the fact that the Iraqui’s hate the US more than they hate Saddam - which they do, by the way).

I think he’s supposed to be on this week. and I wouldn’t be suprised to find a simular thing going on now. back then the french did it for a government contract of some sort.
and does anyone remember the germans shipping weapons material to the Iraqies under the pretext of farming equipment??
those are facts, and that’s why I believe the president more than our european “allies”, they have a vested interest in the dictator.

and Bush does not have an eco/political reason to attack Iraq??? If Bush was a lawyer from CT there would be very little activity in Iraq, even if the CIA did actually dig up any evidence at all of the possibility of WMD i suspect.

and unfortunately strongbad - no one does seem to care about the khurds. we could have taken out saddam in 91. but to keep that region stable we would have had to keep troops there for years, and invested millions to create a stable western style government that would not be overthrown by fundamentalists the moment we left.

naturally we at the left do not care about the Khurds either. :roll:

at the time this was not too apealling as our forces were in the process of a massive reduction in strength - to cut the budjet. so the cia decided to incite the khurds to topple saddam, because they hated each other (like osama and saddam and us) saddam’s army was not allowed to use airpower against the khurds- so he merely eradicated their populance with chemical weapons. those who could, fled to turkey. if we had taken action then, you could justify it. but waiting ten years to seek justice seems a bit like lawyering for a fight.

evil actions by Saddam, pointless actions by the US.