This is an arrogant thing to say. Apparently the United States may not attack someone unless he poses a threat TO THE WHOLE WORLD.
In other words, it's NOT ENOUGH just to be an enemy of the United States itself. No. He must be a threat TO THE WHOLE WORLD. Otherwise, no war, United States!
Sorry but frankly I don't give a rat's ass about what kind of threat Saddam Hussein was to the "world". It's the United States which interests me, as an American citizen. I hope that's ok with me.
People from Germany saying the US shouldn't attack X because X poses no threat to Germany just really pisses me off.
now that we all learned that he had no WMD when the war started?
You think he had "no WMD" when the war started?
Does that include anthrax? Give your proof please that Saddam had no anthrax.
I was responding to a guy who wrote that Saddam posed a threat to the WHOLE WORLD! I told him that I doubt that, and now you reproach me with arrogance? Who are you? Check the timeline of posts before slamming me.
I have never heard any reports that Iraq had anthrax. Prove to me that they did.