Fen321 wrote:
How was he the most dangerous candidate while PAKISTAN whom has nuclear weapons and openly funds terrorist organization doesn't even get a bit of a mention in our axis of evil? Should we not then stop Pakistan now for it seems for that to stand true we should at least follow through with those guiding principles and finish the job no?
Saddam's hatred for America would be stopped by the simply fact that we already occupied the country.
Pakistan (from what I understand, if I am wrong, I retract my comment) does not openly fund terrorists, they do however, harbor terrorists. and by harbor I mean the allow them in thier country on the simple fact that hey do not have the means to oust them from thier country. Also, really who says we WONT invade pakistan if it ends up being necissary?
I agree with you the U.S. government is getting out of hand, but what I am trying to say is that we don't invade countries because it's a fucking hobby.
Fen321 wrote:
Saddam had NO TIES TO AL QAIDA.
The patriarchal style of rule through out the Middle East, which has been practiced for centuries now, leaves no room for opposition in the form of power outside of the hands of the dictator. So why would Saddam allow Al Qaida to function anywhere in its territory? Or for what reason would he fund them?
WMDS none... terrorist ties.....*ha* 9/11 bigger fucking *ha*.
And the bit about not launching weapons into Europe...i was responding to a comment where someone stated that they possed missiles capable of hitting Europe while N. Korea only has the tech to walk theirs around apparently...never mind the testing of missiles.
Saddam had no ties to Al Qaida? I have no proof that he did, but there is evidence saying that he did. Where is your proof he DIDNT? I am going off our reasons to invade not the concrete proof of what he in fact did or did not have. I fully acknowledge the fact that invading Iraq under those terms was foolish and a complete blunder. But it wasn't JUST for us to claim some oil.
Also, when faced with a superior forgien power, why WOULDN'T he aid al qaida to strike at the U.S?
(EDIT: Not saying that I believe the US Gov. about the terrorist ties fully, but isn't it plausible?)
And ok, I didn't see the post about Saddam having those missiles. I disregarded it probably because No way would Saddam even have considered attacking Europe. You are right about that.
Last edited by RoosterCantrell (2007-06-17 11:23:00)