State your case? LOL, Red claimed in another thread that we shouldn't let a third rate dictator push us around? How about a first rate dictator like Saddam? I'll state my case: 1) Terrorist camps in Iraq. 2) Iraq signed a cease fire which they agreed to and then backed out. You who oppose this war are then saying its ok and their should be no consequences for this by your comments. 3) I always thought you guys on the left supported the UN and its work? You definitely aren't in support of the UN if you don't back this war since it was mainly the UN that had a lot to lose. 4) Those that want to cut and run now because its a little tough. There are terrorists in Iraq that we are fighting, Al Quada, you are now saying its not a worthy cause in Iraq now? 5) WMD's were found in Iraq.
Sorry SDman: 1. Never existed. Saddam and Osama did not get along. 2. What cease fire? That is not a reason we were given for going to war. 3. Nope. But you guys on the right forget that we didn't go to war for the UN, they didn't back us. We went to war because of you guys. 4. We're asking for a plan that works, it damn sure ain't working now and there seems to be no plan at all. 5. No they were not. The Pentagon said it themselves.
the cease fire agreement is basically the only reason i cared about when going to war, and was positively one of the reasons given. bush's speech to the UN: " Twelve years ago, Iraq invaded Kuwait without provocation. And the regime's forces were poised to continue their march to seize other countries and their resources. Had Saddam Hussein been appeased instead of stopped, he would have endangered the peace and stability of the world. Yet this aggression was stopped -- by the might of coalition forces and the will of the United Nations. To suspend hostilities, to spare himself, Iraq's dictator accepted a series of commitments. The terms were clear, to him and to all. And he agreed to prove he is complying with every one of those obligations. He has proven instead only his contempt for the United Nations, and for all his pledges. By breaking every pledge -- by his deceptions, and by his cruelties -- Saddam Hussein has made the case against himself. " liberals like to pretend wmd is the only reason anyone gave, but that is not true, it is only what the liberals believe is the easiest reason to shoot down. http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912-1.html
:lol: :lol: 1. I never said Saddam and Osama got along? Are you saying there weren't terrorist camps in Iraq? I believe one of them was a 727 or something?:dis: I nor General Brooks ever mention Saddam and Osama or Al Quada but we are still talking terrorists. I have video evidence of this taken directly from various networks 2. I don't care what the reason was we went to war. Did you forget that Iraq surrendered to terms and then broke everyone of them. You, yourself said we shouldn't let 3rd world dictators push us around!:redface: 3. I didn't forget,Why didn't the UN back us? Could it have been Oil for Food? UN corruption? Why should they back us?:dis: Did you forget why they didn't back us? 4. WE do agree on this point, I have no problem with this issue. Why don't people on the left come up with a plan instead of attacking every issue, have answers for once instead of blame?:dis: 5.:dis: :dis: :shock: Are you saying there were and are NO WMD's in the entire country of Iraq before we invaded in 03? Based on what the Pentagon has said? who is this spokesman? Democrat? Gimme a break:lol: 6. Still waiting for you guys to acknowledge that Al Quada is in Iraq, not worth fighting for? Chaos says better reasons to fight WWII? Maybe in the beginning not now but I have a feeling he was talking about yesterday and today also. My reasoning for this war and the points above don't have to be the same reasons that W gave in support of the war. I am my own person and have my own reasons why I support us there! http://edition.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0304/06/se.01.html http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110007809 From CNN in case we forgot:Quote from General Brooks "With regard to Salman Pak, that's just one of the a number of examples we found where there's training activity happening inside of Iraq. It reinforces the likelihood of links between this regime and external terrorist organizations. Clear links with common interests. Some of these fighters came from Sudan, some from Egypt, some from other places. We have killed a number of them and we have captured a number of them. That's where the information came from."
The Pentagon has never said we found WMD's in Iraq. A Republican Senator who is up for re-elections quoted a sentence from a partially declassified report that said a cash of weopens were found, but they were old and likely non-functioning. The jury is still out on this one.
I'm not saying they are 100% there btw and I don't think it matters if they are old or not? I haven't seen anything that said Iraq could or couldn't have old WMD's? Part of my point is that I agree with you that the jury is still out. I'm willing to bet though, their were some WMD's in Iraq old or not? No way I would be someone on here claiming there was no WMD's in Iraq. Thats just crazy!
You are right if any WMDs exist Sadamm is in violation of UN accord. I think what is more important is the threat posed by any such weapons. We are yet to find anything that would be a threat to America, and I am still yet to be convinced that the sacrafice of our troops is worth what we are getting from Iraq. I seriously doubt these people will support a democracy. I don't think their culture is built for it. Western cultures were civilized for thousands of years before democracy developed. These people were nomadic barbarians until the end of WWI. I know this isn't part of the discussion, but the Brit who drew the lines in the middle east should be dug up and skull drug because his random squiggly line approach is making a crap ton of problems for us in the here and now.
Re: Les Miles in Iraq Man, wtf did any of that come from? Seriously. quag·mire ([FONT=verdana, sans-serif] P [/FONT]) Pronunciation Key (kwgmr, kwg-) n. Land with a soft muddy surface. A difficult or precarious situation; a predicament. You're waaay too quick to make everything into a partisan issue. Yet with nearly every post you insinuate that others doing the same and are bad because of it. I know it's more convenient for you not to believe me, but make no mistake, I'd be just as peeved had a Democrat headed up this debacle.
