country?
Not defending Saddam Hussein, but not convinced by the arguments put forward for attacking Iraq.
2006-06-06 08:43:31 · 6 answers · asked by mary_sconster 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
Actually, no. He was under UN sanctions and having WMD's was breaking the rules.
Although, we have yet to find them...
2006-06-06 08:47:51 · answer #1 · answered by Pitchow! 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Saddam wasnt faced with imminent attack from the US. He refused to comply with the UN ruling to prove that he had no WMD. Bush told him to show his cards or face the consequences. Saddam had been used to bluffing the likes of Chirac and Clinton.
2006-06-06 15:48:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO!!! Not under the UN guidelines, Better read your history on the UN guidelines about Iraq and the disarmament clause
after the first Iraq war.
2006-06-06 15:49:32 · answer #3 · answered by Vagabond5879 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Do you think he waited until he was under imminent attack?
He had killed hundreds of thousands by then. Not convinced because you have never studied anything but liberal media.. God bless the USA & the freedom we receive from it.
2006-06-06 15:47:43 · answer #4 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes.
The people of any nation have the right to defend their country against the illegal invasion by another country.
Like when Iraq invaded Kuwait, or the German invasion of Poland, or as you mentioned the US invasion of Iraq.
2006-06-06 15:46:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
that is entirly correct
but think this also
usa attacked saddam for having wepons of mass destruction
using wepons of mass destruction
CAN WE SAY HIPOCRATE
2006-06-06 15:46:58 · answer #6 · answered by mc_1_2000 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋