Ashley Banfield is interviewing Scott Ritter. He spends the bulk of the segment loudly demanding notice of his great patriotism, and largely debunking the notion of some imminent threat to America and the world from Iraqi WMDs. Scott informed us that Iran is the real miscreant, they have nukes. LMAO!!! We have no honest or legitimate basis to depose the regime of Saddam Hussein, according to Mr. Ritter.
At the end of the interview, he says "why should we put the lives of hundreds of thousands of American military personnel on the line to pursue this wrongful course of action in Iraq.
This raises a sitting duck, cherry pick, follow up opportunity for those who are not mesmerized by their next scripted question, but who are analyzing and measuring the answer to the last question.
Arne Fufkin's follow up: If Saddam Huessein does not have weapons of mass destruction, as you say; if he is as compliant to international mandates as you maintain; why would hundreds of thousands of American soldiers be "at risk" by confronting the Iraqi regime? Certainly not from their conventional threat, you surely aren't saying? What is the source of that Iraqi capability to kill so many of the soldiers in most powerful military in human history, if not some biological, chemical or nuclear weapon?
Ashley Banfield: Duh. Well, thank you for being here Mr. Ritter.