"again it is clear that ansar al islam were vile creatures, but there is nothing linking them with Saddam..."
Are you saying their was no relationship with Saddam and Zarqawi?
"A MUCH stronger link can be made with Iran and ansar al islam. So if this was a war against terrorism then why did we start with Iraq- which had no wmd- and not start with Iran which has a large scale nuclear effort (Iran's nuclear ambitions were far better proven than Iraq's even before the war...)"
Well, first off Iran is much bigger country and more population: Iraq pop: 26,074,906 And Iran pop: 68,017,860. So in very, very rough terms you *might* need twice the amount of troops to occupy. Second and of course more importantly there is no legal basis to start a war with Iran. Iran hasn't invaded a country [such as Kuwait] that subsequently resulted in America being required to use a army to drive them out of the country and therafter signing a cease fire agreement that Iraq failed to follow. Iran isn't *yet* under sanctions by members of UN, nor had dozens of Security resolutions demanding it comply. But it could argued that Iran seems to be in a hurry to get into this kind of situation.
Current Events » in reply to Yes, I did read it...
re: Yes, I did read it...
The whole thread (80 posts)
- America Finally Gets It
- It doesn't look good for Bush in the 2008 elections. (n/t)
- re: What kind of legacy?
- No, it sure doesn't.
- re: No, it sure doesn't.
- re: No, it sure doesn't.
- I think it helps a lot to be a rich conservative. ;-)
- In fine form
- "Pledging Allegiance to the Center"
- To one extreme, people love insanely spicy foods.
- re: "Pledging Allegiance to the Center"
- That's a new one. SDAI coming off a lot more reasonable than you. (n/t)
- The slandered wealthy elite.
- "Pledging Allegiance to the Center"
- In fine form
- Gloating
- Bada bing bada boom
- Here is a list of the lastest polls.
- It doesn't look good for Bush in the 2008 elections. (n/t)
