hobitbob wrote: Well, you would be right about the pre 2002 inspections. As far as the 2002 inspections, you are wrong.
This is a falseood
I am right about the 2002 inspections as well. These alleged inspections did not comply with UN resolutions. It was that well known failure of Saddam to permit full compliance again, as well as all his other such failures, that led to our military intervention in Iraq.
hobitbob wrote: And you didn't know this was happeneing before? I did, and so did most of the rest of the world. We also knew about punitive rape and mutilations.
This is a falsehood
Yes, of course I knew about it! It was you writing like you did not to know about it, that led me to bring it up.
Quote:Maybe [Saddam continuing to rule] would have led to increased aid, and to closer scruitiny on his practices by the world. We will never know, will we?
This statement of yours implies that you think "closer scrutiny on his practices" (continuing murder) was a necessary condition for deciding to stop Saddam and his gang from more mass murder than that.
hobitbob wrote: The US and the far right just didn't seem to care until the WMD excuse fizzled.
This is a falsehood
The right, both far medium and near, is determined to spread and
conserve liberty for every innocent person on this earth. The real difference between far and near rightists is the energy they are willing to expend to right wrongs. The right is committed to the
conservation of the rule of law as a necessary means to the
conservation of liberty. The right has recognized and continues to recognize that tyranny of any is a threat to the liberty of all. It is the right that recognizes that conserving everyone's liberty is in everyone's own enlightened self-interest
The left on the other hand reveals itself to not care about others being tyrannized. It is they who are satisfied to
scrutinize but not prevent mass murder. It is the left that acts like the only reason that would justify Iragi regime change is the discovery of WMD. It is the left that thinks that way, because they don't give a damn about the mass murder of others, but only threats to the mass murder of themselves.
Furthermore, it is the left that is continually advocating that which is unlawful. It is the left that continually advocates violating our Constitution. It is the left that continually advocates judicial activism. It is the left that continually advocates judges making the law whatever the left thinks it ought to be.
hobitbob wrote: Nope, support for Pakistan, and many of the totalitarian regimes in the former Soviet Union are purely products of post cold war politics. Nice try at misdirection, though. In fact, support of Azerbaijan, Uzbekhistan,and Pakistan are Bush innovations.
This is a falsehood
Bush was inaugurated in January, 2001. These countries and their tyrants existed before, during and after Clinton's two term administration. Bush, due to Clinton reductions in our military capability and the consequent limitations they caused, has focused on rectification of Afghanistan and Iraq leadership. Our best hope at the moment is that successes in these two countries will intimidate tyrants elsewhere into moderating or even ending their tyrannies.
hobitbob wrote: See above.
Yes, by all means,
you should see above.