I just saw on Fox News where they compared the current situation in Iran to Iraq in 2002 and 2003. So that means Iran has no weapons and is no threat yet we are probably going to attack them.
Fox is fair and balanced huh??
Commentary from my point of view
12 comments:
Well, it would be the same if we let the UN handle it and have them threaten Iran for over a year - giving them enough time to hide and dismantle their weapons.
Iraq NEVER HAD WMD's. That's according to the U.N. inspector's that were there. ALL OF THEM !
You just exposed yourself as being on the fringe of the left.
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9802/17/iraq.clinton/
Bill Clinton, John Kerry, Howard Dean, and even Jimmy Carter all publicly stated that Hussein was a threat to the entire world. Of course, they said this during Clinton's administration and went silent since.
Don't believe the UN. It is composed of too many countries that had oil deals with Iraq. The inspectors allowed Hussein to dictate which palaces could be inspected and when. The UN allowed Hussein to move his weapons from place to place and eventually dismantle and/or hide them.
Hussein hired and handomely paid nuclear scientists and engineers all over the world, including some from the US. They weren't there to see exotic Iraq. Fortunately,it appears that Iraq never got as far as creating actual nuclear weapons.
How can anybody forget that Hussein gassed a million or so Kurds with mustard gas and other chemical weapons. There are many Kurds in Iraq who are blind and suffer from respiratory illnesses.
Yet you think Bush is worse. That's just unbelievable to me.
Let me see.. U.N. Sanctions were working. Bush made that irrelevent. Bush is responsible for all the deaths and Iraq had no weapons according to EVERY U.N. weapons inspectors over there. Bush chose to IGNORE the facts and start the war where he is DIRECTLY responsible for the deaths of at least 35,000 (according to his words) Iraqis and almost 2200 United States soldiers. Now instead of admitting screwing up this nightmare Bush now ties this with 9/11 which is such a bladant lie (according to all reports) and no one is calling him on this? Yet you wonder why I'm upset?
Now you are skirting the issue. You claimed in your first comment here that "Iraq NEVER HAD WMD's". That was what I was responding to
They didn't according to the U.N. inspectors that were there.
And when you mention President Clinton he also said the sanctions were working. You conveniently left that out huh.
In what manner were the sanctions working? All I heard during the Clinton Administration was that the sanctions were only affecting the Iraqi citizens. They had no effect on Saddam.
They did cause he wasn't developing WMD's or getting any WMD's.
Robert E Wilson said...
You just exposed yourself as being on the fringe of the left.
I'm not sure if you realize this or not Robert but the name of the website is leftoverright. That means I am a liberal and proud of the fact I am. That means my purpose is to give my liberal point of view (on most issues anyway) and to point out the inconsistancies and lies of the Bush Administration and the media that blindly supports him. Just in case you didn't figure it out.
Apparently, you don't know what the word "fringe" means. What I was trying to say is... Oh, never mind.
Post a Comment