Ronn_Bman |
09-26-2002 03:23 PM |
Quote:
Originally posted by Charean:
Just wondering if anyone knows a compelling reason why the US needs to go to war right now with Iraq.
With all that I have heard, it doesn't sound like an immediate threat.
|
Maybe a dozen years of UN mandates and resolutions seems like a "rush job" to you, but it doesn't to me. I wonder why the UN hasn't made stronger moves to enforce it's resolutions prior to now.
I'm not sure what you consider an immediate threat, but the fact he HAS chemical and biological weapons is immediate enough for me. The UN had reason to believe he had them, and there were unaccounted for chemical/biological weapons after the Gulf War, but Saddam continually denied access to facilities.
Maybe you don't think the nuclear threat is immediate, I'd disagree, because someone who has used weapons of mass destruction before and is searching for nukes is dangerous. There is no doubt that he has those Chem/Bio weapons he would never surrender after the Gulf War and those weapons alonemake him a threat. If you'll remember, the only reason the UN called off military action initially was because of Iraqi promise to disarm under the supervision of the UN.
Can Saddam launch a nuclear, chemical, or biological weapon and hit my neighborhood? Nope.
Is he an immediate threat? Yep!
[ 09-26-2002, 03:39 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]
|