cicerone imposter wrote:Well, let's see. Bush made the decision to attack Iraq because Saddam had WMDs. He did a "shock and awe" bombing campaign on Iraq that killed thousands of innocent people. Then, he changed his justification to getting rid of the tyrant, Saddam. After that, it was to bring democracy to the Middle East. Now, it's a war against terrorism. During all this time, our soldiers have killed over 50,000 innocent Iraqis, because Bush said Saddam had WMDs that he can use on us or sell it to other terrorists.
It's really sad some people refuse to see the injustice of having attacked Iraq in the first place, but to continue to support Bush's war in Iraq is a crime against humanity. Our country's defense was developed to keep our country safe from aggression; not to bring democracy to the world, and to attack a sovereign country that had no means to attack or harm us.
In case none of you neocons have noticed, the majority of Americans now say our invasion of Iraq was wrong. Not only that, but that we have lost the war. Only Bush and some blind people continue to believe we can win in Iraq. They're willing to sacrifice more of our men and women for this war that only gets worse every month.
Well lets tally the situation. Saddam thwarted the UN weapons inspectors on every hand, violated every UN resolution, and was shooting at the peace keepers who were there to keep him from murdering Kurds and Kuwaitis.
Every member of the Bush administration, the head of the CIA, virtually every member of the U.N., virtually every head of State in the free world, virtually every member of Congress, and every member of the previous administration is on record as believing Saddam had WMD. Both the 9/11 Commission and the Duelfer Report stated Saddam's intentions to resume WMD development once the sanctions were listed. Recent evidence points to the probability of more WMD being present than was found, but at any rate the 12 weeks we allowed the UN to deliberate gave Saddam plenty of time to dispose of, hide, or ship out any WMD he had on hand. Recent new evidence suggests even more strongly that he had it at the time we invaded though we don't know where most of it was.
Meanwhile some estimated 50,000 Iraqis suffered and died as a direct result of the UN sanctions because Saddam diverted to his own purposes oil for food monies intended for food and medicine for the people. How humane would it be to have left Saddam in power and continued the sanctions? The low estimate of those Saddam murdered of his own people is 400,000 and the high end is 1 million and that does not count all those who were tortured, brutalized, blinded, maimed, raped, terrorized, etc. etc. on an ongoing basis.
I defy you to present any evidence from any credible source that shows that we have killed anywhere close to "50,000 innocent Iraqis". You would be hard put to document more than a few hundred, if even that, who were caught in the fire fights and died. The terrorists however are killing innocent Iraqis every day. On purpose.
And absolutely none of this has anything to do with the fact that somebody recognized that the GOP is more dedicated to fighting the terrorists than the Democrats seem to be these days, a fact that has not escaped the terrorists themselves. And somebody made a joke about it. And that has thrown some lefties on the thread into a state of apolexy.
And some of us continue to believe that it is the terrorists who are the bad guys and not the USA.
Does that about cover it?
