Don:

I note a lot of attacks on the Bush administration without evidence- I have been told many times that I should provide the evidence that the attacks are not true. I merely am using the same logic that those I disagree with use.


michaelr:

"Why don't you take your own advice, bb?"

How is it a personal attack if it is a fact- those who demanded the US not attack, while not even asking Saddam to comply with the terms of the ceasefire he signed, or at least the UN resolutions, ARE hypocrites. I looked back on Mudcat- there are no threads that I could find about how Saddam should comply to prevent the war- just protests that the US might do something. Please correct me on this, if I am wrong.


BTW, we know why Saddam didn't comply with the UN resolutions. It's because he thought he could get away with it. Israel has been subject to dozens of UN resolutions, and has flouted them with impunity. I bet Saddam never thought Bush would make good on his insane threats.

And why is that? You have just supported my point that those who protested the US attack, and not Saddam's non-compliance, are in part responsible for the war.

"If the US is to blame for "giving a green light" on the invasion of Kuwait, then surely the protestors demanding the US not attack Iraq, without asking Saddam to comply wit the UN, gave a "green light " for his continued non-compliance, and thus for the war."

Again, thanks a lot, you all.


Naemanson:

""The US has, and should, act in the manner that it considers in its own best interest. Just like every other country."

I agree. But another act would have been to withdraw those "interests" from the threatened areas. The act that was chosen was based on false pretenses and a poorly thought out policy of pre-emptive war. "

I would rather say that the act was based on the information that was know at the time, which may have been false.


GUEST,freda:

Thank you- I had seen that.

So now all of you will stop attacking the Bush administration, since they WERE acting on the best information that they had, and instead complain about the CIA? WHy do I think not?


Nerd:


I do not see that you have even weakened my statement.

"No Iraqi troops had any time to hide stocks of weapons after he said this, because they were engaged in active combat against US forces in that region until their defeat only days later. "

I do not know when the intelligence Rumsfeld was using had been gathered, nor do you. I do not know exactly how long the Iraqis had to relocate material, nor do you. Your statement is a blank assertion that I would like to see some evidence of.