If we don't go to war people will die. This is also an undisputed fact. So is the sun rising in the morning, setting at night, taxes, and much of the other tripe used by both sides to avoid a logical discussion.
The US has cited what we know about Saddam. What I continue to find amazing is the people believe Saddam more than they believe the US. Just how believable is it that he destroyed all of the missing chemicals and agents and doesn't have a single document to show nor a single person who made it happen. We are not talking about something that you could casually take of the shelve and throw away. These things need to be disposed of carefully. Saddam would have had to personally authorize the destruction and there would have been a chain of people and events that would have occurred, all of which would be likely to leave some record and witnesses. Second, Saddam could have and would have leveraged such an event to open up his country, sell oil, gain some advantage. He wouldn't have done it quietly without taking credit. So again, do you honestly believe that all of the missing items cited in the UN report have been destroyed? On a broader note, under what circumstances do you believe that the UN/US should go into Iraq? Does Iraq have to comply with the UN or do the inspectors have to find the goods? Or, is the only time that the world can do anything is to wait for Iraq to invade or attack another country? What about if they support a terrorist attack? What proof is needed? In either circumstance, do we have the right than to go into their country? Andy ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 Your ad could be here. Monies from ads go to support these lists and provide more resources for the community. http://www.fusionauthority.com/ads.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
