And you have no moral problem with this? Amazing. I would expect this kind of rationalization to come from the mouth of a demented serial killer or communo-fascist dictator, but from a US political hack? Amazing.
A moral problem with what?
With taking out Saddam cuz he has WMDs? In a word, no.
With the fact that we armed him against Iran? Perhaps, but what's done is done and we have to deal with reality as it is, right now. What should we do, gaze at our navels and feel sorry, while Saddam uses those weapons?
I would expect this kind of rationalization to come from the mouth of a demented serial killer or communo-fascist dictator,
What "rationalization"? Saddam has nasty weapons and I advocate taking him out before he can use them. You're the one who's trying to rationalize doing otherwise. Why?
but from a US political hack?
Wow, I didn't know I'd been promoted to the vaunted position of "political hack"... I'm so proud *sniff*
Seriously, what are you talking about? You seem to have completely misunderstood what I wrote.
Saddam's got nasty stuff. Let's take him out. If it's our fault he's got the nasty stuff, that makes it even more imperative for us to take him out (because it's our fault). In fact, that's the "moral" imperative in all this - to undo whatever damage we may have done.
Where's the "morality" in saying "oh well, he's got the nasty stuff but let's leave it in his hands and just hope he doesn't use it anymore"?