Abu Nidal committed terrorist acts for which he was never brought to justice. Hence, he is a terrorist. Therefore, Saddam had terrorists in
Baghdad. I am not bothering to look any further, as it is a "yes/no" question that is answered "yes".
So, on that thinking, the United States is a terrorist state?
Being at one stage they had terrorists IN their country?
Big difference isn’t there, Did Saddam ask him to come to the country, to plan train and execute attacks?
Could we also then accuse Israel, being there are many terrorists in Israel attacking daily?
But, your saying then its justified in what we’ve done to Iraq, to get this man? For something he did a long time ago?
Yes, that is how it works. you surrender in a war under conditions. you fail to meet those conditions, you are removed. seems fairly simple,
and it was overdue.
this is the very thing UBL talks about: we don't have the stomache to finish any war. we rattle our sabre, but no one takes us seriously. like a
parent who yells, but never gets up. "This is your last, last, last, LAST chance, and i mean it".
So what about Israel?
The reason the world hates us, is because we DO go around murdering people and allowing Israel to do as it pleases.
THAT IS WHY THEY HATE US!
So, on your thinking.. instead of STOPPING my bullying on a kid to get him to go along with me, I should just punch his lights out? And all his
friends who back him up?
That’s the stupidest thing ive heard.
I don't know. Some say yes, and they were moved to Syria. Some say that isn't true. No need to argue that, as they found some buried in the
desert. Yes, they were old, and possibly degraded. But the fact that they were there shows not only intent, but a blatant violation of the sanctions.
A perfect example of why we should have gone in long before.
Moved to Syria? That’s total and utter BS.
There were NO WMD’s.. why cant people just swallow that they were lied too.
How on earth did the United States government have concrete proof of weapons facilities and stockpiles, when NOTHING EXISTED?
Why do people still talk this nonsense.
THERE WERE NO WEAPONS!
EVERYONE HAS SAID SO! EVEN THE CRIMINAL HIMSELF.
How can one be so bloody niave and ignorant to claim the half dozen 1980’s mortar shells found buried in the desert shows INTENT and a
What, you think saddam was going to unearth these half dozen shells, lob them at Israel then sit back laughing about it?
Or do you think he sat there snickering and laughing at the UN, about how he had 6 meazly mortar shells that he was hiding.
Absolute filth, ones mind truly needs education if this suggests intent.
And regardless, we went in with proof he was BUILDING NEW WEAPONS and STOCKPILING them, half a dozen forgotten about mortar shells do not constitute
stockpiles, no matter HOW BADLY YOU WANT IT TOO!
No, the US was not guilty. People from the US were guilty, however (and the UN is not a nation). I can assure you that the American people did
not approve any participation in these scandals, and i believe that the US has been the chief party pushing for investigation and accountability for
the oil for food scandal.
No, the world see’s this as the UNITED STATES! Because, after this long no one has taken the appropriate steps to OUST THIS CRIMINAL
You think Osama or all the Iraqi’s who have LOST families are sitting in their mud huts thinking
‘’ Its ok American’s, we don’t blame you. We only blame your leader ‘’
NO, they want to know why their blood should be spilt over American ‘cowardice’THE US is pushing for harsh light on the United nations to
DISCREDIT THEM.The United Nations TOLD the world that Iraq had no WMD’s, Koffi Annan stated the United STATES WAR is illegial under the guise of the
United nations CHARTER.The United States is not pushing to prosecute the UN over its OIL for FOOD scandal, because they too are guilty.
Too little, too late. He had 12 years to comply, and failed.
1. Saddam ALLOWED US IN
But Firstly, what did BUSH SAY?
"... We worked with the world, we worked to make sure that Saddam Hussein heard the message of the world. And when he chose to deny inspectors,
when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him. And we did, and the world is safer for it."
—President George W. Bush
March 21, 2006
What did the OTHERS say?
U.N. weapons inspectors entered Iraq on November 27th, 2002.
Source: PBS Newshour,
citing Associated Press, quoting UN Weapons Inspector Dimitri Perricos
Inspectors searched for illegal weapons, finding few and only minor violations, "no evidence that Iraq was pursuing a nuclear weapons program,"
and "no mobile facilities for producing weapons."
Source: Arms Control Today, the publication of the Arms Control Association, citing UN Weapons Inspector Hans Blix
Their work still incomplete but progressing, weapons inspectors fled Iraq in March 2003 when the U.S. advised them to leave, because an American
attack was imminent.
Source: USA Today, carrying an Associated Press article, citing Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the UN's International Atomic Energy Agency
After the invasion of Iraq, the Bush Administration would not allow U.N. weapons inspectors to return to Iraq.
Source: Sydney Morning Herald, quoting White House spokesman Ari Fleischer
Israel has had decades…
Once again, Saddam didn’t have anything.. it’s a cold person to declare that all the suffering in Iraq is justified, because Saddam did too little
to late. Your beginning to make me sick.
No, that was not part of the terms of surrender. Besides, i am not sure that Saddam wanted direct dialogue with us....can you post a
Saddam asked for dialogue
RhoadsCBS reported Monday that Iraq's President, Saddam Hussein, requested that President Bush join him in an open discussion via satellite.
Hussein reportedly feels this live debate may clear the air between the leaders, possibly putting diplomacy ahead of war.
Regardless of what ANYONE THINKS, you should TALK before you militarily INVADE.
NO, You violated the UNITED NATIONS.
When they said saddam had nothing , and to NOT use force, you did.
Your influence? Your bribed nations to join, trade incentives, financial incentives, and when big nations didn’t follow you chucked a hissy fit and
renamed French Fries to FREEDOM FRIES.
No, that is incorrect. We parted opinions with the UN because we litstened to the intelligence (as faulty as it was) from most of the nations on
Earth. They all blew it, basically.
You parted because they went in, found nothing and told the world so.
But your leader didn’t care, he couldn’t have anyone listening to this, he needed to keep telling the world what they needed to hear to allow it
Its like Iran now
‘’ NIE : Iran is not purusing nuclear weapons “
“Bush: I don’t care what the NIE says, I believe they are “
But the UN was unduly influenced by France and Germany, who we have since seen have their hands very dirty in the aforementioned Oil for Food scandal.
As well, if Bush wasn't a representative of a world givernment, you could compare him to a terrorist. However, being a legitimate leader (regardless
of what half of the nation wants to say), it provides a VERY real difference.
You mean MAJORITY of the US who DIDN’T vote him in?
Sorry, but you get thrown back in the garbage pile with that.
Worked so well that inspectors were repeatedly kicked out of the country and denied access to facilities. THAT was what it was about: stopping the
chemical and nuke's. The "no fly" zones were to protect the neigbors, but represented a secondary aspect. But Saddam was constantly violating the
No Fly zones and shooting at our planes. I think you forget about that.
See above, inspections OCCURRED.
I don't know. The intelligence (as unintelligent as it may have been) didn't support that.
WRONG, the evidence DID support that and to this day STILL SUPPORTS THAT.
HOW CAN YOU honestly say that the intelligence is wrong here.
They said saddam had nothing and was contained,
We lied, waged war saying he wasn’t and he did.
Turns out he didn’t, yet… they are still wrong?
do you have a health report i am unaware of? Another 20 years of Saddam, willing to sell his technology to any wild eyed Saudi millionaire? No thanks.
Had he played nice, and follwed the rules he agreed to in order to retain his power, then possibly. But he didn't, and he knew the consequences.
HE HAD NOTHING. Christ almighty, your pathetic. We are selling more weapons to Saudi than Saddam could of dreamed.
We’re supplying Israel with EVERYTHING.
Man I give up, if that’s honestly how you think, you’re a waste of time.
[edit on 16-5-2008 by Agit8dChop]