To: SwinneySwitch
"..This capture of Saddam really hasn't made us any safer..."
How are we safer now that SH has been captured? Please be specific - because for the life of me I can't see how we're any safer.
To: familyofman
Welcome to Free Republic! TROLL!!!
ZOT! ZOT! ZOT!!!!
24 posted on
12/29/2003 9:53:57 AM PST by
ConservativeMan55
(You know how those liberals are. Two's Company but three is a fundraiser.)
To: Admin Moderator
ZAP! ZOT!!!
25 posted on
12/29/2003 9:54:44 AM PST by
ConservativeMan55
(You know how those liberals are. Two's Company but three is a fundraiser.)
To: familyofman
We have one less tyrannical dictator on the world scene. He can no longer make WMDs, contribute to al- Qaeda, Hamas, etc. The list of insurgents he had with him has proven invaluable in capturing or killing those who would harm our troops.
31 posted on
12/29/2003 10:08:22 AM PST by
WinOne4TheGipper
(Be patient. I'm manufacturing a new tagline.)
To: familyofman
I think that we are safer because, for one thing, his capture sends a HUGE message to the terrorist world and to the governments that support them. I believe that we've already reaped benefits from his capture in several ways.
To: familyofman
From this and previous posts, you seem to like Dean. So, you are serious--you believe that a governor of a state with about 600k people with no national or international experience would be a better choice for C-in-C than Dubya?
And further, you question whether we are safer with Saddam in custody? You're a Freeper, right????
35 posted on
12/29/2003 10:16:59 AM PST by
Pharmboy
(History's greatest agent for freedom: The US Armed Forces)
To: familyofman
How are we safer now that SH has been captured? Please be specific - because for the life of me I can't see how we're any safer.That's a false issue to raise. Libs say it as if the administration characterized the capture as making us safer, when they did not. In fact, as usual, President Bush took pains to say that Iraq was still dangerous and terrorism still a threat.
The only reason to present the statement that the capture of Saddam Hussein has not made us safer is to minimize the capture itself.
Pathetic whining with no comprehension of--or a refusal to acknowledge--who Saddam Hussein was.
Here is an excerpt of exactly what President Bush said in his address regarding the capture of Saddam Hussein
Our servicemen and women and our coalition allies have faced many dangers in the hunt for members of the fallen regime, and in their effort to bring hope and freedom to the Iraqi people. Their work continues, and so do the risks. Today, on behalf of the nation, I thank the members of our Armed Forces and I congratulate them.
I also have a message for all Americans: The capture of Saddam Hussein does not mean the end of violence in Iraq. We still face terrorists who would rather go on killing the innocent than accept the rise of liberty in the heart of the Middle East. Such men are a direct threat to the American people, and they will be defeated.
~snip~
44 posted on
12/29/2003 10:31:29 AM PST by
cyncooper
("The evil is in plain sight")
To: familyofman
To clarify: Not necessarily calling you a whiner, just that's how those who go "The capture did nothing to make us saaaaafer, wahwahwah" sound to me.
I know I've "talked" with you before, and I certainly do not regard you as a troll.
Regards.
46 posted on
12/29/2003 10:34:48 AM PST by
cyncooper
("The evil is in plain sight")
To: familyofman
You don't want to see how we're safer due to Saddam's capture.
According to Berlusconi, Gaddafi told him that he saw what happened to Saddam, which scared him, and that's why he is cooperating with the US.
Attacks against our troops have decreased.
That's two right there. Who knows what info Saddam will eventually give up.
47 posted on
12/29/2003 10:35:44 AM PST by
alnick
To: familyofman
You asked,
"How are we safer now that SH has been captured? Please be specific - because for the life of me I can't see how we're any safer." Saddam Hussein's army can no longer attack or threaten it's neighbors, which would pull us into the conflict. He can no longer meddle into the politics of Iran, Pakistan, Saudi, or the smaller arab states, where we have a stake.
Saddam Hussein's worldwide assets, billions of dollars, is no longer available to finance terrorists, or build weapons.
Saddam's regime can no longer sanction terrorism or export it to our shores.
Saddam's imperial image has been damaged beyond repair. His cowardly capture will hurt recruitment of martyrs.
The end of Saddam signals a new beginning for Iraq, and hopefully for decades to come, one less middle eastern country will hate us enough to try and destroy us.
After even democrats so roundly discredited and mocked Dean for saying the world isn't safer without Saddam, you can assume people here would be incredulous anyone would repeat it.
50 posted on
12/29/2003 10:42:47 AM PST by
YaYa123
(@Common Sense.com)
To: familyofman
"...for the life of me I can't see how we're any safer."
Just be thankful that others can!
78 posted on
12/29/2003 11:27:21 AM PST by
SwinneySwitch
("When somone says he is going to kill you -- believe him" - Gamla)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson