Quote:
Originally Posted by Hard-Driver";p="
The premise of the war was false.
|
The premise for war was based on evidence collected before Bush was elected. The premise for war was to enforce the U.N. resolutions that Saddam was in material breech of for over 13 years. The premise of war was to remove a sadistic genocidal dictator that was a threat to humanity.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hard-Driver";p="
The Premise that this war was for some kind of imminent threat self defense was WRONG
|
So because Saddam was not in New York harbor with a nuke strapped to his back he was not an imminent threat? He was an imminent threat to the neighboring countries, he was a threat to U.S. interests, he was a threat to humanity. How can you not see that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hard-Driver";p="
A Vision of worldbuilding to create a more peaceful and democratic Middle East through the use of force. Get rid of an evil guy we don't like and while we are at it, democratize a country, secure a place for a permanent military base in the middle east, and put a more friendly government on top of the worlds 2nd largest oil supply.
|
Well in a word....YES. The major point being creating a safer Middle East, and democratizing a country. Force was needed to accomplish this task. The people of Iraq are now free to elect their own government officials.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hard-Driver";p="
I want to vote for a man who thinks this was the wrong war at the wrong time....
However, Being that phase one of the mission, taking over Iraq, was finished... We can not trun back now. But Kerry is not turning back, he is for finishing the job in Iraq. He is for democratizing the country. But he understands that to do that requires making an indepent country that will participate in the world environment. And the world environment should be involved in creating their new partner. It is in everyones best interest to have a free society rise in Iraq. Kerry is not against freedom.
|
Kerry would have never done anything about Saddam, just like Clinton didn't, sans lobbing a few missiles at vacant buildings on the outskirts. Kerry would just finish up what he was scared to do himself. He is more worried about his political career, and his Senate voting record shows that, then he is about U.S. foreign policy. If it wasn't for President Bush's actions Kadafi would have never given up his WMD. Terrorist now see that the U.S. has a strong President in charge, someone who will not back down to political pressures, or to let other countries decide what the U.S. should do. Russia has now vowed to join the war of terror, see a pattern here? How many more terrorist acts is it going to take for the liberals to see that this is real?