PM: Canada right on Iraq No weapons of mass destruction found yet

http://www.canoe.ca/NewsStand/TorontoSun/News/2003/05/23/93553.html ^ | Fri May 23 2003 | CP

[Billthedrill]

Good to see you back under another nick.

However, the WMD provided the only legal justification for an invasion.

Ahem. Failure to live up to the terms of the UN resolutions concerning inspection provided the legal justification for the invasion. It was, in fact, fully justified on that basis, as it was on the basis of violation of the no-fly zones, also part of those resolutions, and continuation of development programs in the nuclear weapons field, of which we have a good deal of testimony from former government officials and scientists. What we lack is the public relations splash that a cache of gas warfare ordnance would have given us. It isn't that big a deal - anything we find or found along those lines would have been dismissed as a plant anyway, as will anything we find from now on. It provides a handy accusation because it is sensational, but the accusation would and will be there anyway.

[mabelkitty]

Um, Ohioman is correct.

Documents haven't been commented on because they are being tested by the British.

Notice the Administration doesn't comment on the mobile labs, either?

Know why that is? So it keeps all the salivating Liberals focused on WMD while Congress and Bush pass huge tax cuts and other such wonderful domestic items.

It's called leading the left by the nose, but they are too stupid to see it.

[mabelkitty]

Why would we?

[mabelkitty]

So what you are saying is that we should invade all the other countries with worst human rights abuses first, and then take Iraq? You think we did it in the wrong order? Do tell.

[mabelkitty]

Oh, honey, you are soooo very wrong.
Did you hear the news this morning? Clinton's Chi Com scandals coming home to roost.

Are you warm and fuzzy with the Cox report? Don't worry, you will be.

[mabelkitty]

Do you read anything that isn't in the NYT?

[gcruse]

Someone help Us here in Canada

Well, you can get out and organize street
demonstrations nationwide, forcing dissolution
of Parliament.  Then elect a merged PC-Alliance
majority.

Or, alternatively, sit at the computer sending
messages addressed to yourself begging for help.

If none of the above works, pray for deliverance.
You're welcome. ;-)

[Billthedrill]

?

;-)

[Yardstick]

And how would we stop a nuclear power, such as India, from attacking a non-democratic nuclear power, such as Pakistan?

We would probably use the same methods of persuasion that were available to us before we went to war with Iraq. I don't know exactly what those may have been, but I doubt the Iraq war would have swept them off the table.

[Capitalism2003]

We only gave Saddam a two year+ warning. He didn't have enough time to send his weapons to Syria
</sarcasm off>

If anything, the fact that we haven't found them proves that Bush is an honest man. You can bet Bubba or Gore would have ordered we plant the evidence by now.

[eBelasco]

Convenient. And how would we stop a nuclear power, such as India, from attacking a non-democratic nuclear power, such as Pakistan?

Hmmm, maybe you exposed the flaw in the doctine? Or, maybe your comparison is flawed. India vs Pakistan would be like USA vs France. India vs Nepal would be more analgous to USA vs Iraq.

[mabelkitty]

Well, if I'm wrong, they why is Bush's approval rating still so very high?

Our of a courtesy, I will share some information with you that is off-topic.

Gore isn't running for President because he sees the writing on the wall. 2004 is a throwaway year because Hillary can't run 2008 with a sitting Democratic President.

He's the only smart one in the party.

DNC did now count on Dean and his popularity, so the DLC is trying very hard to make him run Green so as to split the Democratic party. That is why they are having so many public battles. DLC/DNC are all for Hillary's use.

You guys are being used as pawns in this little game. You are being hosed.