On Thu, 17 Feb 2005 05:42:19 GMT, Nate Perkins
wrote:
"Fletis Humplebacker" ! wrote in news:1117j2927qgc938
:
That's a skewed perspective. A timeline was given after
10 years of Saddam's nonsense, including his removal
of power. Dragging it out until UN inspectors were satisfied
wouldn't make much sense since a decade had already
gone by and an Army can't be held at bay indefinitely and
there was a weather factor to deal with. I would agree that
the UN member nations could have solved the problem
but they had their own interests at heart.
Unfortunately much of what you call "nonsense" consists of us accusing
Saddam of having things he didn't have, and then us demanding that the
Iraqis prove a negative.
Not true. We knew Saddam had WMD's. What we didn't know is "when did
he get rid of them". We will find his WMD's when we invade Syria.
You do know that numerous 18 wheelers were sent to Syria during our 14
months of negotiating wiht Saddam before the invasion, right?
It finally came down to the fact that we went to war because we damned
well wanted to go to war. And we were intent to do the tough talk, and
ratchet up the confrontation until we got our war.
Not even close. Saddam told the world he would not agree to the terms
of surrender he signed in 1991. For 14 months the US attempted to get
him to comply.
Not everybody agreed. Our own allies disagreed. The UN wouldn't pass a
second resolution.
France opposed the resolution, so Bush withdrew it. According to UN
1441, it wasn't needed anyway. I'll assume you wish to defend France's
actions.
Here's a good timeline:
http://www.news10.net/news-special/w...q-timeline.htm
There were millions of protesters around the world
taking to the streets. It didn't matter, Bush had it in his head that
he was going to push his New American Century.
Millions? Is that the same as the million mom march? {200,000 = 1
million, according to liberals}
Now we've got our war, and the question is whether or not it is going as
we expected.
No war has ever gone "as expected". That is NOT the question.
It's all fine to spout the prose about spreading freedom
and democracy, but there also needs to be substance behind the rhetoric.
Is anyone learning from the mistakes, or adapting the plan?
Well, there are a lot of democrats that seem unhappy about the spread
of freedom in Iraq.
And the "plan" is being modified on a daily basis, depending on the
situation. That is standard procedure in any war or mop-up operation.
Mike Smith