Those planes they supposedly fire at, wouldn't happen to be flying over Iraq at the time, would they? And, when you say "fire," you really ought to mention that what they really have done is turn on their radar.
By the way, I wonder if you might explain how it is that we can justify bombing a ground-to-ground missile installation while conducting No-Fly-Zone missions?
In other words, what you're acknowledging is that a state of war already exists between our two countries.
Hey, that's what I just tried to tell you. If you're gonna revert to this "but we've been doing bad stuff to them" argument, you've got a problem, because even if accept your complaint then I also come to the realization that We're At War With Iraq.
And call me crazy but I'd rather win the war we're in than lose it.
By the way, I wonder if you might explain how it is that we can justify bombing a ground-to-ground missile installation while conducting No-Fly-Zone missions?
Obviously this is an act of war on our part. Why? Cuz We're At War With Iraq.
Like I said.
(And that makes Iraq our "enemy".)
You have named them enemy, but you seem to be unable to present any evidence to support having made such a declaration.
It's not my job or davisdoug's job to do that in the first place. Presumably it's the Commander-in-Chief's job. And guess what? He already did it, last October.
Furthermore, in doing this, he doesn't have to convince you, let alone France, that Iraq is a threat to the US. The only jury that matters is the US Congress whom we elect. France doesn't get a say in the matter.
And the US Congress already decided in the affirmative, to authorize military action. So your whole point is moot.