don't take this the wrong way but you're confused.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Sultan Of Smut
You missed my point.
|
no I didn't. you chose not to like my answer.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Sultan Of Smut
But anyway out of the 3 in Bush's "Axis of Evil" (muhahaha) which one do you thing deserved attention first? Out of the 3 Iraq was the weakest. Is that why they were attacked?
|
No, they were attacked because we were still at a state of war with them, they weren't living up to their surrender agreement and the people you are currently at war with are ALWAYS far more dangerous then the people you're not at war with.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Sultan Of Smut
Iraq - at the height of their power - couldn't defeat Iran in the 70s and 80s with the active support of the United States.
|
look up the word active. they sold arms to iraq.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by The Sultan Of Smut
So what makes them this "grave and growing" danger which Bush referred to? Could you clarify why Iraq posed a danger more tangible than the one the DPRK represents?
|
I just did. but to expand on it so that even the idiots like Bich can understand, Our military, allies, and oil supply were all in danger for an iraq who, although having surrendered, was not disarming or abiding by the surrender agreement.