Putting aside the arguments about WMD and terrorists, can anyone tell me why they think Saddam should not have been taken out of power?
If you are going to say, "he has the right to run his country", my answer is this. If he has the 'right' to rape, murder, and torture people in his country, who is to say we don't have the right to invade him? If you say (to answer my sub-question) the UN, well the UN has said saddam must not do certain things, and he continued to do them, so why should we have to listen if he doesn't?.
I SERIOUSLY WANT TO HEAR FROM A LIBERAL HERE. Tell me why he should have been left alone.
*why do I know half the answers are going to say something like, "he didn't have weapons", and "there were official no ties to al qaeda"
2006-09-12
16:22:25
·
19 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics