|
Just read the whole thread and will hit a few points that jumped out:
First of all, you simply cannot argue that the first Bush administration made a mistake by not marching coalition forces to Baghdad to removing Saddam from power while simultaneously arguing that the current administration made a mistake by going to war without a UN mandate.
Coalition forces in Desert Storm had a UN mandate to liberate Kuwait -- not a mandate to remove Saddam from power.
Any action by coalition forces to remove Saddam from power in Desert Storm would have been outside the scope of a UN mandate and the same as the current unilateral action.
Is it wrong to follow UN mandates and also wrong to not follow UN mandates?
Secondly, the fact that Saddam was not involved with 9/11 in no way means that he did not actively support terrorists and terrorist organizations.
He did and would have continued to do just that, which made him a target in the ongoing 'war on terror'.
That's all for now....
|