WMDs?

 
 29 Apr 2003 @ 5:58 AM 

This article spills the beans from some anonymous administration insiders. They fess up that we were never all that sure of the WMD in Iraq, but wanted to make an example of someone to show that we were tough on terrorism. I picture Gene Wilder and Richard Pryor doing the, “We bad, that’s right” schtick. Here are some excerpts from the article:

Beyond that, the Bush administration decided it must flex muscle to show it would fight terrorism, not just here at home and not just in Afghanistan against the Taliban, but in the Middle East, where it was thriving.
The Bush administration wanted to make a statement about its determination to fight terrorism. And officials acknowledge that Saddam had all the requirements to make him, from their standpoint, the perfect target.
Other countries have such weapons, yet the United States did not go to war with them. And though Saddam oppressed and tortured his own people, other tyrants have done the same without incurring U.S. military action. Finally, Saddam had ties to terrorists; but so have several countries that the United States did not fight.
But Saddam was guilty of all these things and he met another requirement as well: a prime location, in the heart of the Middle East, between Syria and Iran, two countries the United States wanted to send a message to.

Posted By: Gary
Last Edit: 29 Apr 2003 @ 05:58 AM

EmailPermalink
Tags
Categories: News


 

Responses to this post » (One Total)

 
  1. lysa says:

    That’s just great. But then again, are we really that surprised?

Tags
Comment Meta:
RSS Feed for comments

 Last 50 Posts
Change Theme...
  • Users » 3
  • Posts/Pages » 2,264
  • Comments » 895
Change Theme...
  • VoidVoid « Default
  • LifeLife
  • EarthEarth
  • WindWind
  • WaterWater
  • FireFire
  • LightLight

MythTV



    No Child Pages.

Who is Bunk?



    No Child Pages.