Donkey
Active member
Donkey
You are attempting to justify Iraq by using 9-11. The US Congress report just released 10 days ago stated that not only was there no tie between OBL and Saddam, but that Saddam had tried to have OBL killed. I remind you the reason we went into Iraq was WMD, not terrorism. They are totally unrelated. the only ones that harping on this fanstasy is the Bush Administration, and they do it to confuse people such as yourself. Its a WMD = Weapon of Mass Deception.
Bill Clinton (or anyother president for that matter) would have never attacked Iraq without a just reason. George Bush Sr held off from attacking Iraq in 1991 because he knew (as did Clinton) that Saddam was a effective counterweight to Iran. He was the lesser of two evils. Thanks th W's Recklessness Saddam is gone and the US is know faced with a Nuclear armed Iran, which is a far greater threat to the US then Saddam ever was.
Bravo George, Bravo.
OK see this is the problem that people seem to have....
No where did I say 9/11 and Iraq was connected, however both issues are ongoing at the same...Everyone knew Saddam was a bad man....Osama has also been up to no good at the same time...Just because these two events are ongoing at the same time does not mean that they are connected however fundamentally they are...It is documented that Saddam has been partial to terrorists maybe not Al Qaeda but terrorists none the less... He had attacked and invaded many countries in the Middle East in the past 20 years... He himself could be labeled a terrorist...
Iran[FONT="] is not nuclear armed....And many people including Clinton himself have been quoted for saying that Saddam was a threat.....
But for some reason people want to try and tie the two together in there mind whenever they hear them mentioned....People tend to get tunnel vision and this is a prime example...
-edit
[/FONT] Saddam may be gone and such the counter balance to Iran but the US now has a significant presence in the Middle East...Divide and Conquer
Last edited: