Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: MadIvan
..Oh well, we shouldn't have fought Hitler then. Or even Galtieri. Too unpredictable...

Ive, you're going to compare Hitler and Galtieri, both of whom attacked British territory, with Saddam, who doesn't even control the northern and southern parts of his own country?

20 posted on 02/01/2003 4:58:35 PM PST by Byron_the_Aussie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]


To: Byron_the_Aussie
Ive, you're going to compare Hitler and Galtieri, both of whom attacked British territory, with Saddam, who doesn't even control the northern and southern parts of his own country?

Hitler didn't attack British territory to provoke the Second World War. He attacked Poland.

The point is, that many naysayers in the British government and the peace movements of the time said many of the same things - "war is unpredictable" and so on. Well that's true. Well done. But that doesn't mean that wars should not be fought, nor that there aren't legitimate reasons to fight.

Saddam Hussein has invaded two of his neighbours in the past, is obviously hiding WMD, trying to obtain WMD, funds terrorism. He is a nasty piece of work who should be taken out. And it is clear that just hitting him with a few cruise missiles will not do the job.

Yes going in is unpredictable. Going anywhere is unpredictable. Which makes your perfect prescience that it will all turn out badly all the more curious.

Regards, Ivan

21 posted on 02/01/2003 5:03:40 PM PST by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson