by JoshuaDurron » Tue Dec 16, 2003 2:19 am
First off, the US never agreed to wait for UN sanction before invading. We said we would like their support of our action. Saddam, on the other hand, agreed both not to construct his weapons, and to allow people to check up on him to make sure he was playing honest. He broke both promises.
Second, no it does not logically follow that a person having a knife has killed people. It would logically follow that a person with the means to illegally build an M-16, and who has done so with the stated intent to kill people, could also build a rocket launcher given enough time, quite probably with the same intent.
Third: Evidence has been found. Mobile bioweapon facilities have been found, and tested positive for pathogens. An even if they hadn't, we've examined, at the most, 5% of his weapons stockpiles. That leaves a whole lot of unexamined gear to look over. The US nuclear weapons are what, 1 or 2% of our total munitions? It'd be easy to miss 'em if someone were to just come through and skim over 5% of our arsonel.
All I'm saying is, a lot of people act over paranoid about this matter and leap to conclusions. I'm no big fan of Rumsfield, in fact I think some of the Patriot Act provisions were downright awful. But I'm no fan of Saddam either, and often the person called a leader must choose the lesser of two evils, not the thing that leads to the greater good. Often, such a thing does not exist. This is, after all, the real world. What I intend to do is keep watching the situation as it developes, because history hasn't been written yet, and history is what will ultimately have the final say.
Again: I don't think we've seen enough of Iraq to say if what happened there was a good or bad thing. <p>
"Strenghten your lyre and sing
The hymn of death
The sky opens to us
They fly to the ray"
-Cante per me, Kajiura Yuki</p>