--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: <snip> > Hate to put my neck out on this one but I do seem to remember Qaddafi > mentioning something about not wanting to be associated with terrorists or > terrorism AFTER the invasion of Iraq. I'll agree that he had been wanting to have > sanctions lifted against Libya for some time but he never made a serious move > until after 9/11 and then came the decision to disarm after Saddam was > overthrown, maybe even caught.
Not true. Libya had made several serious moves, but the U.S. didn't follow up because it was more interested in getting the Pan Am 103 situation resolved. See the piece I referenced earlier at: http://www.brook.edu/views/op-ed/indyk/20040309.htm The concluding paragraph: The fact that Mr. Gadaffi was willing to give up his WMD programmes and open facilities to inspection four years ago does not detract from the Bush administration's achievement in securing Libya's nuclear disarmament. However, in doing so, Mr. Bush completed a diplomatic game plan initiated by Mr. Clinton. The issue here, however, is not credit. Rather, it is whether Mr. Gadaffi gave up his WMD programmes because Mr. Hussein was toppled, as Mr. Bush now claims. As the record shows, Libyan disarmament did not require a war in Iraq. To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
