[kurto]

[ QUOTE ]
Iraq violated the terms of the Gulf War ceasefire by refusing to accomodate weapons inspectors and honor the no fly zone. In a pre-9-11 world, we might have tolerated (contained) Iraq. But, because of the rising threat of radical Islamic terrorism, it was prudent (and correct) to pre-empt the most dangerous threats (WMD).

[/ QUOTE ]

All evidence leads one to conclude this is wrong.

"Iraq violated the terms of the Gulf War ceasefire by refusing to accomodate weapons inspectors and honor the no fly zone." The inspectors were granted full access many months before Bush went to war. Pretty much the entire world except for Bush was satisfied with the results of the Weapons Inspectors.

"But, because of the rising threat of radical Islamic terrorism, it was prudent (and correct) to pre-empt the most dangerous threats (WMD)" This is wrong on multiple levels. The most obvious is that Saddam Hussein/Iraq was not an Islamic state. On the contrary, the Islamics considered Saddam an enemy. So, if 'danger from the nation of Islam' is your motivation, then Iraq is the wrong country.

Furthermore, there was no threat of WMD. Prior to Bush's warmongering, Colin Powell gave a speech in Europe where he said that Saddam, due to the earlier wars and their containment, was NO THREAT to the world. Condeleeza Rice also said as much. Then, you had the Bush administration pushing dispelled intel (Aluminum Tubes, the Chemical trucks, the fleet of planes (ie- 2 balsa wood glider) ready to launch a chemical war, etc.) and IGNORING our own intelligence agencies which all seemed to concur that he was not a threat. Now, we have the memo from London where PRIOR to the war, they show that Bush had decided to go to war and would FIX THE EVIDENCE to support their cause.

It still boggles my mind the people who defend Bush when he changed his justifications repeatedly about why he wanted to go there, everything he said and predicted was wrong, multiple evidence (including PNAC's writings, the British memo, etc.) show that they planned to goto Iraq and would lie to get there... There is overwhelming evidence that Bush had his own agenda and would lie, fabricate evidence, whatever to get what he wants.

All the reasons you cite for going to war were things that Bush said, but they were all irrelevent. It doesn't even matter if they make sense. As long as he got his followers on board.

[ QUOTE ]
In the process, we have sent a message of deterrence to the rest of the nuts who want to kill innocent people in the name of religion.


[/ QUOTE ]

Last I read, terrorism recruitment has been up. The US has the worst image International then perhaps ever before. We are involved with more strife and have created more enemies then before while simultaneously losing the trust of many of our oldest allies.

I'm not sure if that's the message we intended.