Originally posted by Ausgedient the Ninja:

Iraq was not a threat then, and they were not a threat now. Hindsight may be 20/20, but I was saying this before we too easily took their country, and before they did not use WMD, not even to defend their very own lives. The war shows how large a threat Iraq truly poised.





There are several significant errors in logic in this post but I want to highlight this one.

You ASSUME that WE (I will not go there now) "too easily took their country" that this is because they COULD NOT have fought back harder..and were therefore not a threat. Time after time, we found large stashs of weapons, empty uniforms, abandoned military hardware. Entire divisions vanished into thin air. No barrier defenses, no coordinated attacks, only sporatic pockets of resistance and suicide attacks...WHY? Perhaps, just perhaps the administration was RIGHT (yes, they predicted this..while cogncent of the risks)? That the army, even the republican guard was NOT so loyal to Sadam as he thought. It seems clear to me that thus far (and its far from over) it was not a lack of capability that Iraq lacked but a lack of will to fight. And given the fact that historically, most countries fight to the death if INVADED "to defend their very own lives" as you say, doesnt this suggest that maybe the general military sentiment was that we were not invading. That we were not threatening their lives...Liberating perhaps??

And no WMD used..does that mean they do not exist?? You really are not suggesting that, because that what you imply by your choice of words. You know of course we have dropped 100s of 1000s of leaflets saying in effect...put down your weapons & go home and you will be free, fight and you may die, BUT>>>USE WMD and we will hunt you down, try you as war criminals, and EXECUTE YOU. Why would a general who knew this follow Sadam's order and release WMD??? It would be suicide. If the general felt that the regime was failing as we raced toward Baghdad, that the risk of Sadam shoting him might actually be lower than the risk of us finding him. Do you not see this as plausible, even highly plausible. I have no doubt Sadam gave orders to use WMD (if he was able to), I have BIG doubts that many would be inclined to carry them out at the best time (when we encircled Bahgdad). Certainly plenty of atropine & chemical protection gear was found in position to be used as if WMD was the plan...Will we ever know for sure, I think so...

BTW, keep your TV tuned. The time we are most likely to start finding WMD is when the IRAQI PEOPLE, who really are the only ones who KNOW where stuff is hidden, believe that the regime is REALLY GONE. And that time is fast approaching.

So, what have we got
Will we win convincingly....yes
Will most Iraqi rejoice in being libertated...yes
Will we find WMD....you bettcha
Willwe find terrorist training camps...heck yes
Did we have the right to do this ....of course, the UN said we could (when they did not think we would/could NO SERIOUSLY...they lost a war to us and reniged on surrender terms, which is a no-no.

These are a given...
Will this make Liberals happy..no, because (insert lame reason).
Will this make other Arab nations happy (well, no. ANY DESPOT RULER KNOWS FULL WELL THAT TYRANNY CANNOT WITHSTAND LARGE SCALE EXPOSURE TO DEMOCRACY. People see happy peopl in other countries = kill despot ruler. So no matter what REALLY happens, the GOVERMENT CONTROLLED Arab media will not/can not allow what really happened in Iraq to be portrayed accurately, any more than it can allow an accurate potrayal of America in general. Like sunlight hitting a Vampire..poof!
Will this make France happy...well, who gives a crap!

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)