- Joined
- Feb 2, 2006
- Messages
- 17,343
- Reaction score
- 2,876
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Conservative
Interesting statement, given the multitude of UNSC resolutions to the contrary, stating that Iraq was a threat to the security of the region.I never said I would wait for 100% certitude. The UN and others asserted that Iraq posed no threat.
Recall, too, that no one questioned the threat that was Iraq until it was clear that GWB was of a mind to actually do something about ut.
Seems to me we had solid, positive intel regarding the existence of both WMDs and WMD programs in 1998, which was the justification for the 3-day war we waged against Iraq in december of that year.We had outdated intel that said otherwise.
If we knew they were there then, and Iraq failed to prove that they had been destroyed/dismantled -- what conclusion can you reach other than they are still there (and that there is a concerted effort to hide them)?
Define "good". Does 19:1 qualify?Why is it impossible to make sure that your intel is good before invading and occupying another country.
If not, why not?
Non sequitur? Relevance?Do we know that Iran has nuclear aspirations? Yes.
Do we know they support terror? Yes.
Have we invaded as we did Iraq? No.
Last edited: