Kent Frazier wrote:
I don't think that Clinton lied about Iraq and WMD's but I do think
he used Iraq and Bin Laden to provide cover for his all too human
horndog tendencies.

It has been the position of the USA and the UN that Iraq had WMD's
since the '80's.
"Saddam is/was an evil man, a really bad guy" an Iranian chap
confided to me , "but what right does the US have to take him out?"
An other guy said later, "Okay so maybe getting rid of Saddam was the
moral thing to do but what gives us the right?"
Guys, I am just a dumb ass machinist, help me with this: evil is bad,
moral is good; where am I confused?

I have not heard any one defend Saddam, who will stand to do so?
Kent

We don't need to be on some crusade to liberate the Iraqis or any other
people suffering under an evil leader. Whether he is an evildoer or not is
completely irrelevant, we do not have the resources to rid the world of
evil. The question is whether he posed a threat to the US and our allies,
and whether we are now safer as a result of the invasion and ongoing
occupation. If we keep on following neocon foreign policy, soon we'll be as
safe as the Israelis.