In order to participate in the GunBroker Member forums, you must be logged in with your GunBroker.com account. Click the sign-in button at the top right of the forums page to get connected.
Thoughts on WMDs in Iraq...
Colt Super
Member Posts: 31,007 ✭
I searched out the following quotes, and thought my fellow GBers might like to see what the opposition has been saying.
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times
since 1983." S
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.
Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing
weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep.
- Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is is calculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
God Bless America and...
NEVER Forget WACO
NEVER, EVER Forget 911
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times
since 1983." S
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S.
Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
- Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
- Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing
weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" Rep.
- Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is is calculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
God Bless America and...
NEVER Forget WACO
NEVER, EVER Forget 911
Comments
NSDQ!
"Also I heard the voice of the Lord saying who shall I send, and who will go for us? Then said I, here am I, send me."
So far, this fiasco has cost the US over $100 Billions, more than 530 American lives, countless Iraqi lives, opened the region to great instability, and has no expectation of our getting the troops home for some years to come. Great move, GWB! [;)]
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Hypocrisy is the homage paid by vice to virtue.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
We did the right thing, and saved millions of human beings. Who can predict which of those saved may do great things for humanity?
These quotes show that the leadership entire nation, over a long period of time, was in favor of our actions.
God Bless America and...
NEVER Forget WACO
NEVER, EVER Forget 911
Sorry, but the fact that our former Presidents and political leaders considered the Intel and issued warnings--but did not invade, does not justify the invasion Our Leader undertook. He used the fear caused by 9/11 as the rationale, and the American people fell for it.[}:)]
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Hypocrisy is the homage paid by vice to virtue.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
If all the people thought the way you do during the second world war,
you would not be sitting at a computer dissing the President of the United States at every opportunity, You would be speaking German and probably be getting shot for speaking out against the government.[;)]
http://www.iht.com/ihtsearch.php?id=129142&owner=(NYT)&date=20040213140148
"You cannot conquer America." -William Pitt, 1777
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Hypocrisy is the homage paid by vice to virtue.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
The third was a reasoned judgment that Saddam had a bioweapon that could wipe out a city; in time, the coalition is likely to find a buried suitcase containing that, too.
E-mail: safire@nytimes.com
Let's address these purported 3 casus belli: One--the American people would never have entertained the idea of sending our troops to Iraq because Saddam was a mass murderer--that is an internal Iraqi issue and not in the national interest of the US. We aren't doing much about the killings in Africa are we?
Two--informed suspicion is simply Bovine feces, and certainly not justifying an invasion of another country. Again, the recent surfacing of the 17 page note from Al Qaeda shows that our destabilizing of the region draws groups who are willing to go and kill Americans--without having to purchase a plane ticket.
Three--uh huh; David Kay is inept too I suppose. Kay just got through publicly chiding Our Leader to shut up about "finding WMD in the future" and pay attention to fixing our poor intelligence.
Again, I repeat: The United States had insufficient reason to invade Iraq given the circumstances; we did so to carry out Our Leader's ability and skill to prey upon the fears of the American people after 9/11; he did so brilliantly.
Ready to ante up some more money for Iraq? It will happen, believe me.[}:)]
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Hypocrisy is the homage paid by vice to virtue.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
What Bush did was radicalize an already unstable area of the world. Iraq, formerly a dysfunctional member of the international community, has now been transformed into a full-blown mental patient.
Before Bush's War, the spectre of a region-wide conflagration was remote. Iraq was, as Hairy said, effectively contained. If it wasn't, then you agree that the U.S. military was not doing its job and that our armed services were incapable of containing a tinpot dictator whose army excelled at fighting unarmed women and children.
Now, after the carrier landing photo ops have settled, Iraq has effectively been trifurcated... Kurds in the north, Shi'ites in the south, and Sunnis in the middle. They're all heavily armed, hate each other and hate us.
The majority, the Shi'ites, will run Iraq if truly democratic elections take place. If the U.S. tries to impose "caucuses" and "districts" (ie, gerrymandered voting blocs guaranteed to NOT let the Shi'ites win), the Shi'ites will likely resort to violence to get their way.
The Kurds want Kirkut (sp?), the major oil producing center of the north as their capital... regardless of the fact that the place is 60% non-Kurdish. They want a "federal" style government that will let them continue their defacto independence. And if the Kurds get their hands on Kirkut, not only will they have an ethnic war on their hands (various Turkoman and Arab groups have vowed to resist), but Turkey has said that they will move in, with or without the U.S.'s approval bacuase an economically sulf-sufficient Kurdistan is NOT to be tolerated.
And the Sunnis haven't let up since day one and, now thanks to Bush's war being seen as an attack on Islam (note: this is the popular perception amongst the Islamic world and NOT my opinion), Al Qaeda really does have a link with Iraq! Congratulations GW! You did in one year what Osama Bin Laden couldn't do for over ten: get Al Qaeda a foot in the door.
Sorry, but that doesn't sound more secure. At least not to me.
God Bless America and...
NEVER Forget WACO
NEVER, EVER Forget 911
If these issues don't make you pause, nothing will--my logic included [}:)]
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Hypocrisy is the homage paid by vice to virtue.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
Stop encouraging thousands of Mexicans to come here and register, thereby turning themselves into taxpayers that can be kept (somewhat) track of.
American consumers are the reason for jobs going out of the country. They always look for the cheapest thing they can find, refuse to pay a few more dollars for American-made goods, so bingo.
Annie-O: Aber Frau Annie-O, Ich sprech ein bischen Deutsch! Nicht gut als Ich bin ein Deutsch federber.[;)]
Ich denke nicht, dass Sie es das ganze Recht bekamen, aber ich bekomme Ihren Punkt. und Sie haben recht, dass Sie sowie ein Deutscher wie meine Oma nicht sprechen[;)]
R/
Dave
How different the world would be if we could consult the veteran instead of the politician. - Henry Miller
Hairy- I remember in the past you claim to have 25 years military service. Who's military were you in China or U.S.S.R? Because you are clearly a commie.
R/
Dave
How different the world would be if we could consult the veteran instead of the politician. - Henry Miller
Please , Lets not resort to this.
"Right is Right, even is everyone is against it, and wrong is wrong, even if everyone is for it"
There is always one more imbecile than you counted on.
Hypocrisy is the homage paid by vice to virtue.
Don't assume malice for what stupidity can explain.
Oh contraire EMM, before the the war the region was tremendously unstable. Iraq had already invaded Kuwait and had a long running war with Iran. Iran was actively seeking nuclear capability and Libya was doing the same, even Syria was mouthing off about attacking Israel.
Since the war Libya has disbanded its nuclear program and allowed inspectors in, Iran has started talking about doing the same and even Syria has shut up and started(though on a very small scale) to arrest know terrorist.
The region is far more stable now than it was. A little fear is a good thing and thes other nations now see tht the USA is capable of and will use fore to protect it and its interests in the region.
Saddam was the big boy on the block and when he went down the other nations too notice. I think long term this war will pay huge dividends for this nation/Iraq and the region.
quote:just think about the Patriot Act; the immense budget deficit we now have; the loss of jobs going overseas; the thrust to permit illegal aliens to enter the country
Hairy please, except for the Patroit act are you telling me that we were not losing jobs overseas by the thousands before Bush became president? Wrong!! We have been losing jobs overseas for the past 20 years and the rate was never higher than under the CLinton admin. No president is going to stop that from occurring, not Repub or Democrat, companies move to get the cheap labor that it offers. Not because of a presidents policys.
As to ilegal aliens entering this country, come on Hairy, under the CLinton administration we had the weakest security on both borders that we have ever had, the Customs and Immigration services were cut to the bone. We(this country has always had a very large problem with illegals entering, it didnt just happen or get worse under Bush's watch.
The patriot act while I dont agree with most of it was changed form what Bush proposed by the Congress, Congress and not Bush gave it far more teeth than was requested by Bush. If you want to complain about it complain to congress as they modified and passed this law, it was not and executive order.
quote:the immense budget deficit we now have
Ok Hairy, like this is the first time this nation has had a large budget deficit. LIke we wont shrink this deficit over the years.
Where did the deficit come from, well lets see, It actually stated under Bill CLintons watch which is when the economic slowdown began(Clintons second term and this according to Allen Greenspan and other experts), it was exascerbated by the war on terror and the money needed to fight that(only Afghanistan). Granted the war in iraq costs money as well, but the cost there I believe will be re-couped in part by the re-building and in lower oil prices in the comming years. The deficit is not all Bushes fault, blame Bin LAden for a lot of this, Bush didnt send him an invite to attack the USA.
quote:the funny mustache doesn't even begin to put Saddam in the same league as Hitler
Hmm, intersting comment: Lets look at it shall we?
Hitler wanted to exterminate an entire class of people(the jews)
Saddam wanted to exterminate and entire class of people (the kurds)
Hitler started a war and invaded his neighbors
Saddam started 2 wars and invaded his neighbors(Kuwait and Iran)
Hitler wanted world domination and a master race
Saddam wanted Middle east domination(at least) and control by his race(Whichever moslem he is)
Hitler murdered thousands of innocent people for no reason (not just jews)
Saddam murdered thousands of people for no reason (see the mass graves that are not kurds)
Hitler wanted weapons of mass destruction and terror (B1 and V2 rockets used to terrify and kill civilian targets and was trying to build a nuclear device)
Saddam had and used weapons of mass destrucion even against his own countrymen(innocent civilians) and Iranian soldiers(gas) and was trying to acquire nuclear weapons.
Hitler allowed no one to question his authority or they were executed
Saddam allowed no on to question his authority or they were executed
Hitler surrounded himself whith brutal, sadistic individuals(Himmler, Goering)
Saddam did the same (his sons for starters), remember the rape rooms in Iraq and in kuwait while he was there.
Lot more comparisons can be made would you like me to continue? Saddam was a lot more like Hitler than you would like to believe.
quote:now thanks to Bush's war being seen as an attack on Islam (note: this is the popular perception amongst the Islamic world and NOT my opinion
And just where did this piece of information/fact come from. I have seen nothing anywhere that says Islam sees the war this way except from the radical(Taliban types) Islamics. On the contrary most of the Islamic world saw Saddam as a threat to them and their way of life and are not at all upset that he is gone.(source: Washington Post and US News and World report and Fox news opnion poll conducted in 4 islamic nations.)While not conclusive I think this better illustrates the feelings of most of the Muslims in the area.
quote:Again, the recent surfacing of the 17 page note from Al Qaeda shows that our destabilizing of the region draws groups who are willing to go and kill Americans--without having to purchase a plane ticket.
Well, thats not a bad thing is it? COnsidering that they have already shown a willingess to purchase the plane ticket and attack innocent civilians here in the US I prefer them to try and attack us there in Iraq where we have the means and weapons to fight back. I'd rather fight them there than here.Would you?
quote:we did so to carry out Our Leader's ability and skill to prey upon the fears of the American people after 9/11; he did so brilliantly
Well he sure didnt have to do much to scare me after 9/11. The terrorist did that just fine by themselves and if it means we invade every country in the middle east to keep it from happening again then I for one am all for it. Better to tkae the fight there than here. If you werent scared after 9/11 then you are stupid. As to preying on our fears, really, can you give me a forinstance? Every intelligence agency in the world thought as we did, a thought that may yet prove to be true.The verdict is not yet in on WMD Hairy.
quote:certainly was not assembling an invasion force against the US, was it? Iraq was not involved with Al Qaeda with respect the 9/11, so that lame excuse that was originally offered by the US is not valid.
So far, this fiasco has cost the US over $100 Billions, more than 530 American lives, countless Iraqi lives, opened the region to great instability, and has no expectation of our getting the troops home for some years to come
Saddam had no need to assemble and invasion force as you put it Hairy. He already had one ready to go, terrorist, just give them the financial backing(can you prove he didnt) and they do the dirty work for you. You also dont need and invasion force if you have the means and methods to deliver Chemical and/or Biological weapons to an intended target. Can you say without a doubt that they dont exist Hairy?, Were you ready to bet your and countless other innocent lives on the statements of David Kay? Do you know for sure that WMD's werent smuggled to another country or arent buried somewhere in IRAQ? BEt you life on it Hairy? EMM?
Lets see 530 lives, for the familes who lost a son or daughter its one to many, in the context of a war it is a minute number. War is death, people die in war. To acomplish what the US did with the very very very small number of casualities (some of which are from accidents and not combat which could have happend on a training excerise as well) is unparrallled in the anals of history.
While any loss is regrettable and to be mourned if you use this as a yardstick then this country will never be able to defend itself from any type of agression. In most wars 530 dead is a daily number not a total for a year or more. It shows how well we planned and executed the plan was against the worlds 3rd largest and best equipped army.
As to the claim of Iraq being aligned with BinLaden, it was one of many reason given for going to war. The main concern was that Saddam had WMD and would either use them himself or give them to terroist to use against th US and its allies. Do you think he would have Hairy? If you do then you have to agree we did the right thing, if you dont then you are either naive or stupid, your call.
Based on the intellegence given to congress and the president we did what needed to be done, take out the bully on the block first and the smaller bullies will think twice before starting a fight. Somtimes in a fight you get you nose bloodies , I think in thsi one we barely got scratched, thats the way you want a fight to end, whit barely a scratch on you.
In summation I have a few thoughts, we will know at some point of time if Saddam has/had WMD's. They will either be found or evidence that they didnt exist will surface.
Iraq will be the death knell for organized terrorism for some time, the more forigen fighters go there to fight us the more they either die or are captured and the more of their funds they have to spend doing so. The money well for them is not bottomless.
Lots of documentation and data was lost during the war in iraq, through bombing, fires and looting. Not tomention what was destroyed deliberately either before or during the war by Saddam's people themselves. This data may well have pointed to the answer to the question of WMD's and any alliance with terror.
The cost in lives while low is regrettable but is a small price to pay for what belive will increase our security here at home.
Will there be another attack on US soil, probably, but far less than would have occurred if Saddam had been left to his own devices.
The economy is already turning around to the good, even the naysayer himself Alan Greenspan sys so. More jobs are being created and fewer people are filing for un-employment claims. This in itself will help to decrease the budget deficit as the tax base grows.
It costs money to fight a war, in Iraq or Afghanistan, that money comes from the budget, would you have prefered to have not fought either of them Hairy? EMM?, just let the Taliban/AL Quaieda and Saddam go on about their merry way? or did you think we could fight a war and keep the costs within a budget?
If you lok at the facts, all the facts and think about them with a partisain filter I think you will find that Bush is a good president, the ecomony is improving, the wars were justified(remember we are fighting 2 wars, one cause), we are better off now and safer than we were with Clinton. The tax cuts have put more money in my and others pockets including business pockets and that spells economic stimulas.
Give him another 4 years and this country will be in the best shape ever.
JuJu(who has so missed these political discourses)
"We arent lying. Bill Clinton said there are WMDs, so it must be true."
I guess it all depends on what the word WMDs, is.
For some great quotes by the GOP, see below.
www.lunaville.org/WMD/billmon.aspx
"Waiting tables is what you know, making cheese is what I know-lets stick with what we know!"
-Jimmy the cheese man
Hmm, intersting comment: Lets look at it shall we?
"Hitler wanted to exterminate an entire class of people(the jews)
Saddam wanted to exterminate and entire class of people (the kurds)"
Hitler wound up killing over 12 million Jews, Slavs, and other "undesirables."
Saddam, in terms of being a genocidal maniac, ranks up there with Idi Amin and just below Pol Pot.
The regime in Indonesia and Myanmar has killed more people each in their respective regions of the world than Saddam did. Where is their "liberation"?
"Hitler started a war and invaded his neighbors
Saddam started 2 wars and invaded his neighbors(Kuwait and Iran)"
Hitler got farther faster, conquering most of European Russia, all of Western Europe, Scandanavia, most of the Balkans, and most of North Africa.
Saddam invaded Kuwait and Iran. The death tolls from these two wars combined was exceeded by the death toll at Stalingrad... and that was one BATTLE in the war Hitler started. Kind of puts things in perspective, doesn't it?
Hitler wanted world domination and a master race
Saddam wanted Middle east domination(at least) and control by his race(Whichever moslem he is)
No denying that Hitler and Saddam were meglomaniacs. Just a note though: being a Muslim is not a "race." Baathists espouse Pan-Arabism.
Hitler murdered thousands of innocent people for no reason (not just jews)
Saddam murdered thousands of people for no reason (see the mass graves that are not kurds)
CORRECTION: Hitler murdered millions (this figure excludes the Jews killed in the Holocaust). Calling his death toll "thousands" is like saying Bill Gates has "scores of dollars."
Hitler wanted weapons of mass destruction and terror (B1 and V2 rockets used to terrify and kill civilian targets and was trying to build a nuclear device)
Saddam had and used weapons of mass destrucion even against his own countrymen(innocent civilians) and Iranian soldiers(gas) and was trying to acquire nuclear weapons.
Hitler's weapons were not WMDs. They were terror weapons, but the WMD had not been invented as we know it. True, he was working on nuclear weapons (a project headed by Werner Heisenberg), but the fundamental premise under which the Reich was operating was so flawed, a useable weapon was not forthcoming.
Saddam was trying to acquire nukes. So are Brazil, Saudi Arabia, and Japan. Israel already has them and they've started 3 of the past 4 wars they've been in... how's that for aggression? Why aren't we putting a stop to them?
Hitler allowed no one to question his authority or they were executed
Saddam allowed no on to question his authority or they were executed
There are dozens of those the world round, Kim Jong Il in North Korea being a prime example. Once again, why aren't they being deposed? I mean, they're just like Hitler, right?
Hitler surrounded himself whith brutal, sadistic individuals(Himmler, Goering)
Saddam did the same (his sons for starters), remember the rape rooms in Iraq and in kuwait while he was there.
Kim Jong Il is even worse and yet Bush plays ball with him. If being a horrid man is enough to make you Hitler-bad, then why aren't we stopping them now?
Lot more comparisons can be made would you like me to continue? Saddam was a lot more like Hitler than you would like to believe.
You left out they both had dark hair and both had mustaches.
My point was not that Saddam was this innocent little lamb... just that he wasn't Hitler Part II.
And comparing ANY meglomaniac to Hitler is an easy pitch a blind child could score a home run with... Hitler practically defines the words "meglomainac" and "tyrant." Of course there are going to be similarities!
Now, I could bring up a host of similarities between Bush and Clinton... doesn't mean they're one and the same.
Thank God for that!!!!
As to comparing Saddam to Hitler, regardless if one was as bad as the other, they both needed to go. As for Pol-pot and others this President wasnt in office at the time so I cant speak to that. But, I do believe that North Korea will be addressed(in some manner) as soon as the most immediate threat (Terrorism) has been either reduced significantly or eliminated (elimination is not likely given the world today). You can bet that North Korea and other would be petty tyrants and Hitler wannabes have taken notice of what we did in both Iraq and Afghanistan and will think twice before provoking us.(at least as long this this President remains in power.
I would much prefer a safer and saner world but its not gonna happen in my lifetime, as such I prefer to have a President with some Cojones as opposed to one who talks the talk but cant walk the walk.
Peace through Superior Firepower is not just a slogan, sometimes you need to just empty the magazine.
The democrats are now saying they got bad information (read intelligence) else they wouldnt have voted for the war. Yet the President got the same Intelligence when he made his decision.
Its a cop out in an election year. People are saying that we are in another Vietnam, bullcrap!!!, in Vietnam we were losing up to 1000 men a week, we have not lost that many this entire war, in Viet Nam we had no clear cut goals, in Iraq we did and do, we are also achieving those goals. Just a few months ago people were crying that we couldnt find Saddam, well we found him, now its WMD's, given time I believe we will either find them or what happened to them, the problem lies in this immediate satisfaction society we live in, if it isnt instant then it takes to long, whether its coffee, communications or war. Unfortunatley war and life are not instant, they take time, effort and money to complete. If patience is a virtue then I am afraid that the democrats, the liberal media and even some on this board have no virtues.
Please forgiveall my mis-spellings and typo's as I havent been on the keyboard much since I got sick and my skills are a bit rusty.
JuJu(I really have missed our discussions)