|
Edited on Wed Feb-15-06 02:35 PM by BushOut06
Just for shits and giggles, let's say that Saddam did have some WMD material sitting around before we invaded. Let's even grant that he engaged in the best hide-and-seek game in human history. So what?
What most people tend to forget is that not many people were disputing the fact Saddam had WMDs before the war started. The key issue is did Saddam pose an IMMEDIATE THREAT to the United States? Meaning, is there ANY information that Saddam was preparing to use those weapons against us? Saddam had no means to deliver any WMDs, his longest-range missiles barely had a range of a few hundred kilometers (if that). Saddam may have been indirectly supporting groups like Hamas, but there were NO ties to "international" groups like Al Qaeda.
THIS is the justification BushCo used to go to war - not the mere presence of WMDs themselves. Heck, there are lots of countries around the world that possess biological and chemical weapons, are we going to start invading each and every one? (Well, given the disposition of this administration, that's a distinct possibility)
The next time some neocon tries to pull this shit on you, you need to pin them down. Ask them precisely what the "immediate threat" that Iraq posed was. Don't accept the "well, Saddam could have done this or that". That's not what an "immediate threat" means. Pin them down, make them squirm. When they can't come up with anything, spit at their feet, walk away, and say "Yeah, that's what I thought".
- on edit - I still don't believe that he actually had them, I think most of them were either destroyed in '91, or during Clinton's bombing actions (1997?). It is, however, somewhat possible that a few WMDs may have survived, although they sure as hell wouldn't constitute the "stockpiles" that BushCo claimed was such a dire threat.
|