The graves didn't prove anyone wrong. Nobody (not even the craziest liberal) claimed that Saddam was anything other than a brutal dicator. There are plenty of such graves in the world (in Zimbabee, etc) but that doesn't mean that we should go to war.
The graves didn't prove anyone wrong. Nobody (not even the craziest liberal) claimed that Saddam was anything other than a brutal dicator. There are plenty of such graves in the world (in Zimbabee, etc) but that doesn't mean that we should go to war.They stand as proof positive of Wolfowitz’s third criteria, second is support for terrorism, the third is the criminal treatment of the Iraqi people as well as the second, terrorism, for which there is ample additional evicence. I was addressing the other poster as well, who seemed to imply the sole reason for the war was WMDs, which was false.
Personally, I have little doubt he had WMDs, and that we’ll find evidence of their disposal and transfer. In fact you’ll find reports of transfer to Syria, under control of uncontrollable rogue elements according to the Syrian government, posted on FR last fall.
As to whether atrocities on their own are cause for intervention, IMO in most cases no. I wasn’t supportive of Kosovo (or Bosnia), though I think it would have been proper for the EU, it’s their backyard. If it was a matter of a 5,000 troop deployment, I probably would have supported a deployment in Rwanda. In the case of Iraq, I think Sadaam’s atrocities, coupled with his support for terror and the threat he posed to middle eastern oil fields (those troops weren’t in Saudi Arabia to enjoy the scenery) might have been enough even without the WMDs, which I’ve no doubt existed.
I view the intelligence issue separately, and think a thorough review is called for. The smoking guns weren’t there, there may be reasons, possibly destruction, possibly lousy intelligence, which should be addressed.
"The graves didn't prove anyone wrong. Nobody (not even the craziest liberal) claimed that Saddam was anything other than a brutal dicator. There are plenty of such graves in the world (in Zimbabee, etc) but that doesn't mean that we should go to war."
When our "nation Interests" are at stake..... or our "national Security", we go to war. Zimbabwee and the Congo threaten neither. Besides, the UN took the "lead" there, and NOW they are calling for more MILITARY strength and power to use to control things. I don't think the Congo or Zim had 17 UN resolutions that they've ignored either. We'll deal with what threatens are way of life...... 21st century civiliation, not 7th century, as the clerics in Iran want. Nuclear capability there is not a good thing.... nor is it in North Korea. Want to just wait til the rouge states use them on the USA before acting? I don't.
"There are plenty of such graves in the world (in Zimbabee, etc) but that doesn't mean that we should go to war."
Sez you. I have a long list of tyrants I would like to see get their asses kicked by the USMC, starting with our dear friend Fidel.