Quote: Dan, I was not talking about Pentagon war plans, which I suppose they have for every country on Earth (updated annually, too!). I was talking about the POLICY in favor of unilateral invasion of Iraq, which was created and nurtured in the neo-con think-tanks mentioned earlier. Let me know if you want the background info on Perle, Wolfowitz, Rice etc., and their prior careers as developers of these neo-con Iraq war policies in the 1990s.
If you have some info that is not from some over the top liberal hit squad, then I'd like to see it.
In all honasty, and WMD/oil-for-food issues asside, I think Iraq makes an interesting case for invasion. Unpopular middleast leader, known invader history, known mass murderer and saddist, humanitarian reasons, people starved by yet Saddam refractory to sanctions and UN resolutions, strategic location in heart of fundamentalist Islam yet less fundamentalist people, oil rich for self sufficiency, not TOO strong militarily (c/w say Iran) and someone who had generated his credibility in the US by defying the U.S...IF one believed that democracy is the antithesis of fundamentalist Islam, that the 2 cannot co-exist side by side, and IF one was interested in attempting to implant a muslim democracy in the "belly of the beast" I think Iraq probably makes an optimal candidate. Is THIS where the "neocons" were comming from?
1999 Amazon Green SVT Contour (#554/2760)
"People demand freedom of speech as a compensation for the freedom of thought which they seldom use."
-Soren Kierkegaard (as posted by Jato)
