Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Broadside Joe
Did Saddam or did he not support terrorism?

Was that the question or was that not the question?

Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq did not pose an immediate threat to the western world. It was morally right to liberate Iraq - but that´s all. I have understanding for those who do not regard this as sufficient to attack a ´sovereign´ country.

60 posted on 03/28/2004 7:14:08 AM PST by Michael81Dus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies ]


To: Michael81Dus
"Was that the question or was that not the question?"

It was a simple question that only requires a yes or no.

The next question is wether you will answer or not.

64 posted on 03/28/2004 7:19:51 AM PST by Broadside Joe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: Michael81Dus
Ah, there's the problem. You, like much of Europe and the anti-American crowd, are still thinking in pre 9/11 ways. Ways that came crashing down with the WTC and the deaths of 3000 innocents.

1) Iraq was a priciple in both regional and world wide terror.
2) Iraq had the intent of procuring MORE WMDs. Whether they had them at the time of liberation or not is inconsequntial.
3) No matter what Europe and th corrupt UN says, the US should not have waited until points 1 and 2 collided. At that point, we end up with even more dead US civilians.
4) Saddam Hussein lost all rights to the protection of sovereingty when he did the following:


81 posted on 03/28/2004 9:06:57 AM PST by Turbo Pig (If They Don't Respect US, They Should At Least Fear US.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: Michael81Dus; Grampa Dave; knighthawk
Perhaps you haven't seen this:

Report Details Saddam's Support for Terrorists Who Killed Americans

The above link is the FreeRepublic discussion thread.

The actual article is :

"Saddam Hussein’s Philanthropy of Terror"

It is a pdf document with substantial footnotes and put together by Dewey Murdock of the Hudson Institute.

87 posted on 03/28/2004 9:57:54 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach (The terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States - and war is what they got!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: Michael81Dus
Are you in favor of Slavery?
The most often used phrase when I am in Germany is "They were his own people. You had no right to invade". Therefore, is it ok to watch that madman kill millions of his own people? The Europeans were sure anxious to bomb the hell out of Serbia with a lot less evidence of mass extinction while not bothering to get UN approval. I smell hypocracy.
Or, "It was all for oil" Why would we want to pay $ 1000 per barrell including the costs we incurred, if we can get it at about $35? Doesn't make sense.
Remember, sticking your head in the sand will make an inviting target of you ass while it is up in the air.
92 posted on 03/28/2004 10:29:07 AM PST by americanbychoice2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: Michael81Dus
Iraq was a primary supporter of terrorism. Check a middle east map. Look at the strategic importance of Iraq in the middle east. Your statement is like saying that there's no reason to take a knight located in the middle of a chess board because the object is to get the king.

Elected governments and the elimination of dictators who foster terrorism is a primary tactic in the war on terror.

94 posted on 03/28/2004 10:47:40 AM PST by Richard Kimball
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: Michael81Dus
Re: Iraq and AQ. Read Richard Miniter's book Losing Bin Laden, especially Appendix A, then get back to me.
99 posted on 03/28/2004 11:09:32 AM PST by mewzilla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

To: Michael81Dus
Unlike Afghanistan, Iraq did not pose an immediate threat to the western world.

Bullhockey! You must be very young and don't remember what Iraq has done since the mid-1980's.

Iraq was only tolerated during it's war with Iran because Iran was a bigger threat to the world...and still is.

But once Iraq invaded Kuwait, it was a new ballgame. It became clear Saddam was going to fight the western world by trying to control the oil supply.

We stopped him and then did nothing to contain him. Twelve years and 15 unenforced UN resolutions later, a new sheriff came to town and after 9/11 it was time to put up or shut up.

The UN following France, Germany and Russia decided to shut up. Your PM Shroeder decided to save his own hide instead of leading by blasting America to the far left to get re-elected. What a coward. You deserve a snake like that running your country into the ground.

Iraq was supporting, training, and paying terrorists around the world. Some of the 9/11 hijackers had a cell in GERMANY! Saddam paid Palestinian terrorist' families after they blew themselves up. Saddam harbored terrorists from Hamas, Hezzbollah, and Al-Qaeda. He had training facilities in Iraq teaching them how to hijack planes.

But it's great to see you Germans now care about 'sovereign' countries.

136 posted on 03/29/2004 11:17:00 PM PST by Fledermaus (Ðíé F£éðérmáú§ ^;;^ says, "I give Dick Clarke's American Grandstand a 39...you can't dance to it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson