> Ken Ketsdever <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > And we know this to be the case because you say so? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Sam Morris [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > If Iraq did have the WMDs and nuclear weapons and we > had even more proof then we had last year, France, > Russia and Germany still would not have supported the > war. Most Arab nation still wouldn't have supported > the war.
Bushies seem to forget that Mr. Powell had a unanimous vote for action within the UN Security Council. At the time Mr. Bush decided to invade, the SC was asking for the final report from the weapons inspectors that was expected in 3-4 months and a final resolution authorizing war. So the truth is that the UN was backing war given those requirements. You can argue that the second resolution wouldn't have been approved, but then why was the first one? I believe that countries with a fiscal incentive in Iraq wanted time to secure their assets before war. Why Mr. Bush pushed to war to avoid those 4 months we won't know but it seems to be a big mystery to everyone for which no good answer has been given. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Purchase from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=34 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:133693 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
