Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Arpanet
No. There was never any intelligence stating for sure that Saddam had WMD. Rumsfeld's pre-invasion comments to the contrary, the administration never had incontrovertible proof of the existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction. Why? There never were any WMD. We should have been POSITIVE of that fact before using it as justification for invasion. "There are probably WMD over there somewhere" is not enough. And why does what Saddam thought matter? It's not the intelligence community's job to know what Saddam thinks; their job is to know what's *actually there.* There are no WMDs in Iraq. So why are we there?
|
lol. even the UNs weapons inspectors said that sadam had them before the war. What about the Gas he used to kill the kurds? Every bit of intellegance pointed to Sadam having WMDs. Why did France veto the resolution for war? Because they had lots of illegal deals with Sadam. and how about that oil for food program. AFAIK the USA hasn't got one once of oil for the war. But before the war France, Russia, Germany and several other countries were, illegally. Bush did the brave thing and put his political future on the line to rid the world of Sadam. I personally would like to see him president again, and i'll vote to that effect.
__________________
