What Bad Thing Has Saddam Done Lately?

Various ^ | 4 September 2002 | Self

[Fred Mertz]

I'll make this short and sweet. I have not seen evidence for a reason to invade Iraq or demand a regime change there.

Okay, Saddam gassed his own people twelve years ago or so. There have been multiple accusations of his development of weapons of mass destruction, including biological and chemical weapons development.

All the TV footage I see of Saddam Hussein is about 10 years old. Show me the evidence.

[Stentor]

Any country could say that about the U.S. as well. Doesn't mean they should invade us.

Do you think this is some kind of middle school debate? It's a freakin knife fight. Thank you for sharing your puerile concepts.

[Fred Mertz]

What if Iraq is responsible for, 1993 WTC bombing, TWA 800, Oklahoma City, September 11, anthrax ?

I have those and a few other things I think Saddam might have contributed to, but the official word says otherwise.

I want specific evidence. That's not too much to ask for, is it?

[The Toad]

RE: I'll make this short and sweet. I have not seen evidence for a reason to invade Iraq or demand a regime change there.

This is an easy one--violations of UN ceasefire agreement(ie weapon inspections).

[jammer]

What if Iraq is responsible for, 1993 WTC bombing, TWA 800, Oklahoma City, September 11, anthrax ?

What if Iraq supports teenage smoking? Or underage drinking? Or voter apathy? The man just asked for evidence and this is what you give?

C'mon, Fred, it's just too easy to bait 'em. You musta' been bored.

[Texasforever]

I want specific evidence. That's not too much to ask for, is it?

What would convince you?

[Chad Fairbanks]

The simple answer? He has not complied with any of the agreements he "agreed" to follow in return for us stopping the rightious ass-kicking we were laying on him...

Complex answer? If this man get's nuclear technology, I'd say it's safe to bet that we would be hit... or Israel would... either way, that would not be good...

Legally, we may not have much of a leg to stand on, but morally I feel we do... but maybe that's just me :0)

[OwenKellogg]

>>>I want specific evidence. That's not too much to ask for, is it?<<<

Fred, here it is in a nutshell. The world was told "You're either with us, or you're against us".

Since Iraq is not "with" us, then we are obligated, as the world's only superpower, to effect a regime change so that they will be "with" us.

Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

[grimalkin]

I want specific evidence. That's not too much to ask for, is it?

Of course not. We all want it and I believe we'll get it. None of us, however, can answer you're question... we're waiting for specifics just like yourself.

[Fred Mertz]

Do they inspect our weapons development? No, that's not good enough.

Pardon me for flagging some friends to my vanity post.

[grimalkin]

What would it take to justify going after Saddam in your mind?

[marbren]

I feel the evidence will get specific enough to make the case for the American people, We will probably never learn the whole truth because of Clinton's involvement.

[Texasforever]

Seriously, I would like to see why we need to go after him at this moment. I have no doubt he needs to go for the long term stability of the region

If,as you say, he needs to go at some point, why not sooner rather than later?

[CharacterCounts]

What Bad Thing Has Saddam Done Lately?

Is there some kind of statute of limitations on mass murder, genocide and terrorism?

[OwenKellogg]

>>>Pardon me for flagging some friends to my vanity post. <<<

They will be assimilated, too. :)

[BrooklynGOP]

Do they inspect our weapons development? No, that's not good enough.

They would be if we lost the war and agreed to let them. And if we went back on our promise, I am sure they would've attacked us.

[ChadGore]

Off the top of my head, he's what he's done latley:

1) He purged his Border to his east when he invaded Iran (1 Million souls lost) (1980 - 1988)

2) He purged his border to his south when he invaded Kuwait. (1990)

3) He purged his border to his west when he invaded the kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Khost) (1991)

4) Redefined eco-terrorist when he blew the oil fields and flooded the persian gulf with oil. (1991)

5) Broke his promise to the world and kicked out weapons inspectors. (1998)

6) Harbored the worlds most murderous islamic terrorist, Abu Zabada, up until his death. (2002)

[RedBloodedAmerican]

Who said you have a need to know? Maybe we need Clinton back where National Security was released to the media beforehand. Just a thought.

[Miss Marple]

How specific? What will convince you? Transcripts of intercepted phone calls? Satellite images? Photographs? Personal testimony by defectors?

Somehow, I don't think that evidence that is provided, no matter how specific, is going to convince you.

I just have this niggling feeling that you would dismiss them as forgeries or computer generated fakes.

[Fred Mertz]

So I suppose we're going to take out North Korea next month.

I know, you were playing along with me O_K. Some people don't see it though.

[john in missouri]

"Besides the fissile materials, Saddam has been trying to obtain the other components necessary to construct [one or more nuclear] bomb[s]--sometimes with the help of our Western allies... In 1998 Iraq ordered from a German company six lithotripsy devices, extremely expensive machines that treat kidney stones without surgery. Why did Iraq require lithotripsy when millions of its citizens lack basic antibiotics? Presumably because the lithotripter employs an incredibly high-speed switch modeled on the high-speed switches in atomic warheads. Justified as a medical purchase, Iraq obtained eight of the switches, one in each machine plus two spares. Initially Iraq ordered 120 spare switches, a figure totally unrelated to the normal operation of lithotripters, and one that should have made Saddam's real purpose unmistakably clear. The German company balked at the purchase order for 120 switches, but happily sold the eight."