Originally Posted by MrFatbooty
These kinds of ignorant statements are EXACTLY why the war hawks will never understand the objection to our country being in Iraq. Are you really so naive as to suggest that we who object to the Iraq war do so just because the UN didn't give the go ahead?
We weren't attacked! We weren't going to be attacked! There is no evidence that Iraq even had the capability to do what our government claimed they were going to do! There is no evidence that Iraq had any formal ties with al Qaeda! Our government asserted that because Saddam did not account for weapons he had at some point in the past, that he still had them!
This has all been covered before, and you can take your incessant right wing posturing the hell out of my thread.
Mike, first off, he is allowed to have his opinion. If not then why even start the thread in the first place. He is totally right in my opinion. Iraq had these weapons and they were not following the rules that were set for them. Did you really feel safe in the words of Saddam that they did not have WMD? Did you really believe he would act peacefully and not attack us or some other country and potentially start a neuclear war? If so, you are very niave and trusting to a fault. Saddam is known for his lying and scheming and we did the rght thing by attacking and helping establish a democratic society in Iraq.
If you don't think so I can send you a link to hundreds of letters that DEMOCRAT Politicians wrote to Clinton when he was in office about how we had to take action. Clinton never did. Then Bush takes action and we were wrong? Give me a break. Of coure they would contradict themselves. This is for two reasons. 1. If they didn't then they would have nothing to run on in the 2004 election. 2. Bush is a Republican. If he were a democrat it would have been the greatest thing in the world. Gotta love how Democrats jump from side to side when it is convient for them.
