If you ask me there is greater moral imperative to invade and take this guy out now than we had in the Gulf War, for God's sake!! What would you suggest that we wait around and have him hit us again? I bet these same guys would be sitting on their hands then as they are now!
I don't mind a little thoughtful consideration but Sadam, the Mullah's in Iran, House of Saud, Hosni Mubarek, and Syria need to be shown that terrorism is a loosing form of warfare. I persoannly feel that if we took him out the first time, Sept 11 would have never happenned. Why, you ask? Because We would be controlling those Iraqi oil fields and the Saudi's would have been exposed for the thugs they are long ago. Faced with competition for oil they would be shaking down OPEC and terrorising their other customers. We would have also sent a message thoughout the Middle East that says "Don't you dare mess with the US or you WILL loose your country". These thugs only respect one thing: Force and Power. Its time they were shown what REAL power is in the hands of a commited, enraged, courageous and freedom loving people. We HAVE been provolked. The time for action is now!
This alleged link has no credibility. First, the 9/11 terrorists did not need the help of the Iraqi government. Second, terrorists are not going to discuss their plans in the open in a restaurant in Prague.
"We" would not be controlling a damn thing. The best we could hope for is quasi-US companies (really multi-nationals, Exxon, Chevron being the prime examples) gaining contracts to produce and sell the oil. This would be a benefit as long as they keep it flowing, no matter what the remaining OPEC members demand, but corporations have been known to restrict supply to increase profits. And those profits (aside from whatever taxes the Treasury does collect) won't be going to the US, but to *surprise* the same elites that made this whole thing necessary in the first place by placing the US in defense of the House of Saud in 1991. So, unless we create a national oil company to exploit our new-found spoils, with the spigots unfettered and all profits going into the Treasury, young Americans will be in harm's way for corporate profits.
Thus, a bullet in Saddam's head is the cleanest and most just means of achieving our stated goal. Invasion serves only a select few.
LTS
Tell me about it! Don't you just love these people who fall all over themselves to write huge counterfactual screeds bizarrely predicated on "if we attack Iraq without provocation"??
It's like saying, "If we start to distrust Bill Clinton for no good reason...." and then launching into some discussion over it. Or, "If we start to suggest that Tiger Woods is a good golfer before he wins anything...." Or, "If we decide that the stock market is doing poorly before stocks even start falling..." I mean, are these people living in an alternate universe or what?