Rice calls Saddam an evil man who will wreak havoc if left to own devices

Associated Press ^ | 8-15-02 | JANE WARDELL

[Oldeconomybuyer]

LONDON (AP) --

[SEGUET]

"A poll published Monday in The Daily Telegraph found that 28 percent of Britons thought that the United States would be justified in attacking Iraq, while 58 percent disagreed. If the United States does strike, only 19 percent thought that Britain should join in the military action."

That is really bad news - without Britain we are in the old American Standard!

[SodiumWarthog]

"There will be no world order if the most powerful states are entitled to remove other governments at will. There is no doctrine of international law which justifies regime change."

Oh, he wants justification, does he?

• Violation of the U.N. terms of cease fire - expulsion of the weapons inspectors.
• Acts of war upon the U.S. - assasination attempt of George Bush Sr. during his trip to Kuwiat.
• Acts of war upon U.S. citizens - clear links to Iraqi intelligence to bombings of U.S. embassy in Kenya
• Acts of war upon U.S. allies - support for Palisitinan terror groups.

More knowledgable Freepers than myself can probably add to the list but the point is clear. We've a load of justification what we need is the right time to strike.

NaW.
(And JDAMS! Lots, and lots of JDAMS...)

[GraniteStateConservative]

Condi Group Posts bump.

[hobbes1]

Shouldn't that be, Future President, and Nat'l Security Advisor Rice....oh wait, I was Dreaming again.

[sobieski]

Since he has not yet wreaked havoc, when exactly "will" he?

[hobbes1]

HE already does. in addition to gassing his own people, which If I am not mistaken is a crime against humanity, he controls a major portion the staple of the global economy (Oil), in addition to being linked at every turn to most of the terrorist attacks agianst US interests as far back as 1993.

Do you require More?

[hobbes1]

Try This..

[sobieski]

Please stick w/ the facts: SH did not gas his own people. The story line on that has changed (see the NYT this past weekend). Human Rights Watch concluded that gas is not lethal enough to kill as many people as was rumored. The Army War College Study found no mass graves. So the story now is that he "machine-gunned" them. There were no ties between Al Queda and SH (the guy is a secularist, after all). We have bottled up his oil, by our actions keeping prices high. (BTW: Even if he gasses Iraqis, why should we fight over that? We are supposed to fight for strictly American interests). So I ask again: when is he planning to wreak havoc?

[hobbes1]

And you did not address the most glaring fact. absent the Clinton Administrations desire to LOOK like it was doing something about the terrorism, that a weak Democratic presidency invited, Iraq's tentacles lie at the heart of all of the major Terrorist strikes against the US in the last 10 years.

P.S. Gassing (if it is true) his own people is enough to go in and depose him on the spot. It is truly a Sin, that we have allowed Mugabi to get away with that BS that he has for so long. One wonders if he were White, and the objects of his oppression, Black, if he would not be roasting down in Hells eternal BBQ already....

[sobieski]

Hobbes1 We are not the world's policeman, so if he gasses his own, so be it. And that was allegedly 15 years ago; seems like he stopped it. SH is not at the heart of terrorism, but Al Qeda (and Saudi Arabia). SH seems to be on the sidelines.

[hobbes1]

I am sorry, I replied before the post fully sank in...

The story line on that has changed (see the NYT this past weekend).

Literally ROTFLMAO!!!!!! Since when does the NY TImes count for anything, in the way of accuracy, or even remotely non editorialized reporting during this Administration....here is another de facto editorial masquerading as FRONT PAGE NEWS

However, if you are letting Sulzberger and Raines do your thinking for you, my poor power to add or detract from what you already think is far too miniscule for th task at hand....

Well, the NY Times said....lol, still ROTFLMAO....

[hobbes1]

No Al Queida, is a terrorist front, perpetrating acts, that can only be accomplished by a STATE SPONSORED actor....

IF oyu need the political dissertation, about why it is not Publicly held that way, I can give it,...you only need ask say so....

[sobieski]

Actually, it was a letter to the NYT, which signals that the Establishment can't make the "gas" charge stick. I'll refer you to Jude Wanniski's Polyconomics web page; he's hardly right wing. And who cares if he gasses Iraqis anyhow? It doesn't affect Americans. Can't say I know any Ameicans who want to die for an Iraqi.

[sobieski]

Right; and the state is Saudi Arabia

[hobbes1]

No. Money comes from the Saudis but that is about it. The Saudis do not have nearly the Military, and intelligence facilities to orchestrate such actions, nor, (ala Israel) is it in their interests to carry out such attacks, and point the subtle clues at Iraq. the Saudis have more to lose by Husseins deposing, than anyone excepting Saddam...

Yes, I read Jude, but in this case he is flat out wrong...The Cole, The Khobar Towers, 9/11, WTC bombing, the Dual Embassy Bombings...all roads lead to Iraq. It is time for Him to go.

[hobbes1]

A little CNN Chat to help you out

[grasshopper]

CNN, NY Times? -- You have to try THIS. Enjoy.

[Alex P. Keaton]

[MeekOneGOP]