Posted on 07/16/2002 6:37:16 AM PDT by truthandlife
My guess (but not my preference) is that the President will not request a declaration of war, but attack based on the what congress did pass just after the September 11th attack, the right to use all force necessary.
"...anyone saying different is the terrorists' friend", continued Perle. "Everyone's going to win, in this one. My buddies at Martin Marietta and McDonnell will sell more rockets and fighters than they ever dreamed. The president's poll figures will go back up over 70%, on day one. And you know what a war does for network ad revenues? Hey, bombs away!"
Yeah. Those 1970s Sov technology Scuds. All three of 'em.
Hey, give my best to the boys 'round the water cooler at Langley, okay?
"He replied: 'There, as far as I am aware, is not evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the actual attack on the 11th of September...
Right. So....what's the war for?
Or does that question make your head hurt, Mr President?
Yeah. Those 1970s Sov technology Scuds. All three of 'em.
If interested, you may want to read this. Iraq has a few more than three scuds.
Why, you....questioning the Fear Campaign. Do you care about the time and effort invested by media and government in scaring the pants off everyone? How hard they have worked, on the anthrax/smallpox/ suitcase nukes/cyanide in the water scares, just over the last couple of months alone? No, you don't. You guys always want more, more, more. Bigger, bigger, bigger. Alright. Since YOU asked for it...here's what Saddam and Al-Qaeda have been working on this week:
STAY HOME, GROUNDHOG DAY 2007!!!
I'm interested, and thank you. The article says that Iraq has between six and sixteen of these totally obsolete missiles. When the full might of the US military is brought to bear they'll be about as helpful as a wooden leg in a bushfire.
Since we can not be 100% sure, it is only prudent steps be taken to neuralize them.
I haven't a clue what those steps may be, but I am certain we have been on a scud hunt for months.
I believe these missiles will be on the top of any target list being made up.
That won't work. There is no evidence that Iraq was involved in the WTC and Pentagon attacks, and the congressional authorization was only to go after those responsible for these two attacks.
The aiding and abbetting those who would attack us.
There is no negotiating with a whacko like Hussein.
What's there to negotiate? My only claim is that a wiser course of action would be to put Saddam on notice that if he tries anything against us he's history. Otherwise we let him alone. Saddam is not a wacko. He would not have survived in power this long if he were. He's a cold, brutal, calculating dictator, but certainly not an irrational one. He knows that if we wanted to we could topple him before you can say Baghdad.
You know, it might not be information, but the willingness to talk about it. Why does the FBI and Mayor of LA say that the July 4th shooting at LAX was an isolated incident and not related to terrorism? They discredit themselves with this kind of nonsense.
The Czech government from the Prime Minister to their Intelligence Chief say that Mohammed Atta met with Iraqi Intelligence Al-Ani at the Prague Airport. They stand by that information, inspite of the CIA and US Gov trying to discredit it. I guess Al-Ani was just an old Atta family friend.
Like it or not, their are some in the middle east who have declared war against us. Saddam may or may not have had direct hand in WTC, but he is providing financing for terrorist groups.
Not doing anything (other than warning him) will not stop terrorism against this country. Taking out the source of finacial aid, and base for operations will.
So by that logic, we have to take out every regime that has the capacity of harming us. Good luck.
Saddam may or may not have had direct hand in WTC, but he is providing financing for terrorist groups.
I have not seen any reports or evidence that he's financing Al Qaeda. He finances homicide bombers in Israel, but that's Israel's problem, not ours. If you have any evidence that he's financing anti-American terrorists, I'd love to see it.
Not doing anything (other than warning him) will not stop terrorism against this country.
Whoever said it would? It would stop him from attacking us because he knows he would be history if he ever did it.
Taking out the source of finacial aid, and base for operations will.
If you think taking out Saddam is going to stop terrorism, I've got a bridge to sell you.
Sit back and wait to be struck with weapons of mass destruction by a WHACKO. "Wise" is not the four-letter word I would use to describe your chosen COA.
Sorry, but I am sure the truth is somewhere in between killing everyone that "may" harm us, and doing nothing until it is too late.
One reason we have a government is so they can make these types of descisions.
If you do not see the difference, then you do not want to see the difference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.