Nor the Taliban, North Korea, Iran, or Syria...
Well then I wonder who the heck it was that attacked the Cole, World Trade Center, etc...
Relative weath and troop strength are not valid measures of threat in the war on terror. So despite your theory that he posed no threat to the US, the facts are that Sadam was supporting terrorists, Suicide bombers, etc... and that those were determined to be a direct threat against the US.
We believed he was a threat...We believed he was an even bigger threat because Sadam himself led the world around in circles as if he had a huge WMD stockpile that he was trying to hide...Hindsight says that we were probably wrong on the WMD issue, but that still doesn't change the fact that we BELIEVED Sadam was a serious threat. We decided we didn't want to live with that threat anymore so we eliminated it.
And I'm sorry if that threatens you.
Scott Evil
Current Events » in reply to re: Invading Iraq had nothing to do with your security
re: By your definition, Bin Ladin isn't a threat to the US either.
The whole thread (27 posts)
- Question on the "Global Test."
- Now I get it. It's not the French who need to approve. It's the Martians.
- re: Bush's sending mixed signals was hard work.
- Sure: poor choice of words
- re: Question on the "Global Test."
- re: Invading Iraq had nothing to do with your security
- One line says it all.
- re: This is the beauty of the Kerry doctrine.
- Belmont Club