Quote:
Originally posted by Torone@Jun 11 2003, 02:44 AM
"Information out of other inimical countries seems to support the ties between Hussein and terrorism. Are Liberal memories so short that 9/11 is back to being just an emergency number? Or is it a matter of 'the enemy of my enemy is my friend'?"
I think that Saddam's own words and actions as well as the evidence at Salman Pak (sp?) would convince REASONABLE people. Of course, there is also the FACTS that he was paying suicide bombers and that he put out a contract on Bush 41.
I have, until now, refrained from mentioning the fact that Clinton thought him to be a serious threat; or that the same people now defending Hussein were all for attacking him when Clinton was in office.
Jr, you KNOW all this...are you really an idiot; or are you just stirring shit for the fun of it?
|
the ties between Saddam Hussein and Terrorism were weak at best. Really weak. The support between Saudi Arabia and other "allies" is/was pretty strong.
whats the connection between 9/11 and Iraq? Saudi Arabia supports terrorism and only recently began to do something about it.
Why not Saudi Arabia if it was about national defense and fighting terrorism? I think thats a losing argument too. Where did the 9/11 hijackers come from?
I dont think that one argument is better than the other when it comes to terrorism/wmd's and Iraq.