miles..."But regardless of any bluff on Saddam's part this latest report supports the vast majority of weapons inspectors and other experts (that did not have some other hidden agenda) that have said all along that Iraq did not have any WMDs "
Maybe NOW......but that was never the case in the lead up
Even Butler rekoned they existed and his threat and risk profile was unacceptable.
What SH did was pour the most inflammable of accelerants on to the justifiable and totally understandable paranoia and fear that came from 9/11 and in so doing played a most significant role in the advent of this war.
What his actions really did was lead the US/Britain coalition to assume the worst!
Sure the evidence may have been equivocal
But a good analogy is this......
Cops are chasing a real bad guy. A guy who has shot and killed many. Including other cops. And has sworn to kill them all or be killed himself.........
They corner him and he reaches into his coat.
Gets shot.
But has no gun.
Who's really at fault?
For mine
....only the most ardent of anti-US, Yank-haters believe that had SH complied with the inspectors
....had he demonstrated he did NOT have a programme....
...that the Coalition would have invaded.
sh...wmd - here's what i dont get.....?, page-4
-
- There are more pages in this discussion • 47 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)