Posted on 11/28/2009 8:02:29 PM PST by ReaganCaesar
Do Dumbocrats really think that Saddam Hussein would stand by and allow Akhmadinejad to get WMD and not want them for himself? Iran and Iraq were the bitterest of enemies, remember. They were constantly at war.
Shirley you jest. Eastern Syria is for weddings. The one plant blown up by Israelis was for power only. After all, it’s for the children.
Saddam used WMD on Iranians during their war.
He also used them on the Kurds.
The first thing you need to do to be a liberal is to flush common sense and replace that with massive naivete and hope.
and Syria is in bed with the Iranians..... hmmm...
It doesn’t matter what Sadamn had, the world thought he had WMD’s. If GWB hadn’t taken action, his same detracters would be ridiculing him for that. He was in a no-win postion.
I think it is without question that Saddam would have renewed his NBC programs at the first opportunity. Those kinds of weapons are political as much as they are military (perhaps more so). Being the first nation in the region (not counting Israel, obviously) to have a credible nuclear threat would bring enormous regional influence. IMHO, Iran’s nuclear program may well be as much about becoming the dominant player in Middle Eastern politics as it does with future hostile intentions against Israel or the U.S. (though those must be taken seriously as well).
This is how I explain the WMD discussion to liberals, every one of them convinced he never had any.
I blow someone away with a chrome .357 revolver and it is covered in media around the world. I use this weapon with proficiency because it is well documented, again all over the world, that I used this weapon in Iran previously.
Then Uncle Sam kicks my homie’s asses after they raid their neighbors house (Kuwait). Part of my groveling to save my hide is I promise to show that I have destroyed my chrome .357. I don’t and obfuscate for a dozen years, then Uncle Sam writes me letters saying he will search my 170,000 sq mile home. 6 months later they start a search.
Does the fact that they did not find my .357 chrome revolver prove conclusively that I never owned it? Or that I never used it?
This is how I explain the WMD discussion to liberals, every one of them convinced he never had any.
I blow someone away with a chrome .357 revolver and it is covered in media around the world. I use this weapon with proficiency because it is well documented, again all over the world, that I used this weapon in Iran previously.
Then Uncle Sam kicks my homie’s asses after they raid their neighbors house (Kuwait). Part of my groveling to save my hide is I promise to show that I have destroyed my chrome .357. I don’t and obfuscate for a dozen years, then Uncle Sam writes me letters saying he will search my 170,000 sq mile home. 6 months later they start a search.
Does the fact that they did not find my .357 chrome revolver prove conclusively that I never owned it? Or that I never used it?
And just before the search starts, you are seen shipping boxes to your Syrian neighbor.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.