Replies

From reply #17 madrussian wrote in response to my question to him about what should be done about Iraq and Saddam's weapons of mass destruction (reply #14):

"As for Iraq, they are one of the most secular countries there. They have regional ambitions, who doesn't?"

Should I take this to mean that you believe nothing should be done about Iraq and Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction.?

When you say "who doesn't have regional ambitions " are you including Russia ?

Russia and Putin I noticed warned the US recently not to take any action against the Russian client state of Iraq.

Should I take this to mean that you believe nothing should be done about Iraq and Saddam and his weapons of mass destruction.?

I'd like to consider proposals of what "should be done" first, while fully realizing the agenda some may have, and staying rational.

And when there are no facts that would prove what the title alleges, then I think it's worthwhile to point that out, no?

When you say "who doesn't have regional ambitions " are you including Russia ?

Russia clearly has interests there.

Russia and Putin I noticed warned the US recently not to take any action against the Russian client state of Iraq.

Well, not only Russia, but Europeans too are very sceptical. Wouldn't you be?

James Woolsey on anthrax (http://instapundit.blogspot.com/):

Woolsey also has little doubt Iraq was implicated in the wave of anthrax letters that hit the US after September 11. As he ironically told the audience at Herzliya: "It is possible that there is no tie between the anthrax mailed in the US and those who perpetrated September 11, that it is entirely the product of, let's say, a crazed, American Nazi Ph.D. microbiologist in a well-equipped laboratory in a cave somewhere under Trenton, N.J. That's possible.
But if this crazed microbiolo-gist had nothing to do with September 11, then it is a coincidence that he was ready to mail the anthrax one week later. Or, he was thinking about it and then after September 11 very quickly organized his laboratory and started mailing anthrax in one week.
Now if you think both of those scenarios are pretty unlikely, as I do, then the only other alternative is that September 11 and the anthrax had something to do with one another. And if those who suggest that if there is an American or an independent terrorist group involved, that means that Iraq is not involved, that's nonsense. There is no sole source of contracting requirement for international terrorism. Joint ventures are entirely allowed.