Quote Originally Posted by ironchef
Is that even an attempt at an agrument?

C) Hussein was responsible for deaths of his own people in Iraq, which he had been doing for a LONNNNNGGGG time, way before 9/11.

D) Have they found any WMDs that posed any kind of danger to the U.S.? Nope.

I don't know why I even bothered to respond, but oh well.

So what you're saying is because he had been doing it for a long time, we needed to let him continue? NO, He was commiting mass murder and it wasnt just that. He did not comply with UN regulations numerous times.

Of Course they didnt find any major WMD's. The UN wasnt allowed to do random searches for them. Its not hard to hide something if you know where the people are going to be looking. The point is, he said he had no WMD's. And he did. whether or not they posed an immediate risk to the US or not. To have the technology, and have us look the other way only would have bought him the time to get the technology to make one able to attack us. Use your head, just because there was no immediate threat, doesnt mean there wasnt a threat. And you think it costs a lot now. Imagine we let it go, they got the technology and Hussein had gotten all 7 palestinian nations together before he attacked us and we had to fight back then. That would have cost a sh*tload. Why not just go ahead and foresee a problem, and take care of it before it escalates. Isnt that the first step of conflict resolution. damagae control. Of course you are probably one of those people 10 years from now, if we hadnt taken him out, that would still be bashing Bush for his lack of action when we got attacked....