From: John K Clark (jonkc@att.net)
Date: Sun Feb 16 2003 - 21:47:32 MST
"Samantha Atkins" <samantha@objectent.com>
> As I and others have pointed out, the so-called Kuwaiti invasion
> was greatly inflated and partially a setup by America. [...]
So, this list is asked to listen to the wisdom of someone who calls the
invasion of Kuwait "so-called" and the political expertise of someone who
says it was somehow (not specified how or why) an American "setup";
I don't think so.
>We then inflated what was going on and faked (as later came out)
>satellite evidence of a massive Iraqi Army maneuvering to also
>invade Saudi Arabia.
Baloney. He had a massive army and after he swallowed Kuwait he could have
taken over Saudi Arabia in just a few days if he wanted to and he certainly
wanted to, the only reason he didn't is fear of the USA, and if he knew the
president was listening to advise from you he would have no fear and the
world would be a sadder and more dangerous place today.
>The US and Britain have unilaterally imposed no-fly zones
Well Boo Hoo, poor Saddam has lost some of his power. So this list is asked
to listen to the ethical advise of somebody who thinks no fly zones are a
moral outrage but invading Kuwait is not. I don't think so.
>and conducted bombing runs on various manufacturing centers
>on the grounds that perhaps they could somehow be used for
>producing weapons.
Perhaps? For good or bad very soon now we are going to know for sure if
Saddam has weapons of mass destruction or not, you seem to be predicting
he does not, I'm predicting he does.
> Saddam is far less dangerous than Israel or North Korea or even
> Pakistan.
Saddam is the only leader in the world who wants weapons of mass
destruction, invaded his neighbors twice, has a chance to control the
world's supply of oil and has actually used chemical weapons on his own
people and on others.
John K Clark jonkc@att.net
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Feb 16 2003 - 21:50:44 MST