Current Events — HabitableZone

Current Events » in reply to re: "Similarly, Saddam was required not to have WMD" & To Demonstrate It

re: "Similarly, Saddam was required not to have WMD" & To Demonstrate It
Tom Brosz — (archived)

You make quite a big deal about Saddam "cooperating" when surrounded by a good portion of the military forces of the United States. Had those armies not been there, he would have told the U.N. to go take a dive at a doughnut. Then, he basically led the U.N. around by the nose.

This is the pattern of Saddam's "cooperation" through all those years after the first Gulf War. Violation after violation of agreements. Lie after lie. The man has a consistent and persistent pattern of attempting to develop weapons of mass destruction and concealing these efforts with every skill at his command. The level of evidence required to convince a reasonable person he is doing it again would not need to be that high, and the actual evidence, real and circumstantial, that I have seen convinces me.

You and others here consistently behave as though Saddam Hussein is "innocent until proven guilty." To extend Mark's analogy a bit, a criminal on parole after being convicted of dozens of felonies is no longer in that category. If you are on parole, and the cops want to search your place for guns, particularly in light of the fact that your M.O. was to hide weapons on your premises, it is a violation of parole to refuse them, and they can bust you for it. Whether they find guns or not later is beside the point, at least legally, and the "search" of the "house" is far from complete.

BTW, the members of the Security Council who fought against us did not do so for high moral reasons, but because their nations were making shitloads of money off Iraq, and owed them more besides. While the Left keeps trying to promote the myth that we went in this alone, we were supported by many other nations, including Italy, Australia, and Britain.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (54 posts)