Re: [WAR]: not about WMD

From: Michael Wiik (mwiik@messagenet.com)
Date: Sat Apr 26 2003 - 21:58:38 MDT

  • Next message: Michael Wiik: "Re: [WAR]: not about WMD"

    dehede011@aol.com wrote:
    > If you are a Libertarian I suggest you go back and review the
    > arguments about pre-emptive attacks that were all the rage in the party back
    > when the movie Deliverance came out. The basic philosophy hasn't changed a
    > whit and a pre-emptive attack is still an allowable defense.

    I agree totally. If Iraq posed an immediate threat to us we would have
    been within our rights to attack. What this thread is about, is that the
    statements about such a threat coming from the administration were a
    tissue of lies. So, there was no threat, and apparently not any WMD
    either, and it appears some administation officials have now said as
    much to ABC.

    The only reason a majority of the american people supported the war is
    because americans will support their country at war. The polls I saw
    prior to the launching of hostilities seemed to indicate that americans
    would support the war given a U.N. mandate. Remember those polls?

    If there was no threat then this was an aggressive war and a war crime.
    (Some may say the last war never really ended, and argue the rightness
    of it legalistically, which is fine). But there was no threat.

            -Mike

    -- 
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 26 2003 - 22:06:42 MDT