Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Rotty261 Whosewar. This will be my first, last, and only reply to this. |
this does NOT help you make your case. I could say the same thing. useless words
Quote:
|
If you also believe this statement that you borrowed from another forum, then maybe you would also believe that the world would have been a better place had the warlords in Somalia not been toppled, or maybe if Hitler was left in power to try and take all of Europe as his own. At least the US would not have built a deficit by commiting themselves to the war right?
|
donot deduce my words. I never said anything about Hitler. I have noticed right wing people like to amplifier other people's words
Quote:
|
....Saddam was a war lord, I would probably agree that if he was still in power there would not be the kidnappings and beheadings of people foreign to Iraq. Mainly because the foreigners would not be there. There would however, still be the threat of Saddam making and using WMD on his own people. I am in Iraq and I can tell you that while he was in power there were two classes of people in Iraq, the very well to do and the extremly poor and poverty stricken. There were not schools that all children could go to, there was not medical care for many of the citizens. ......
|
okay, very simple logic here:
If go for Sadam is because US want to remove a bad dictator, tell me why choose Sadam? As I said in another post, There are genocide everyday in Africa, why left Somali? Why never touch Sudan? Why not go for North Korea?
If go for Sadam is because terrorist, there are more real terrorist now in Iraq, how do you explain that?
I agree Sadam is bad guy, I disagree to handle him at this time and with such manner
I am warning other people here (kidding,
DONOT CONFUSE YOUSELF BY MIXING "REMOVING SADAM" AND "REMOVE SADAM AT THIS TIME ALONE"