Pro-Bush dopes and neocons are quick to label anyone who challenges our Iraq policy as "Unpatriotic" or "Pro-terrorist". But, honestly, how dumb do you have to be to claim that deposing a secular government in Iraq and replacing them with pro-Iranian, pro-Hezbollah Shiite radicals is in our best interest?
And, neocons, before you start whining about "WMDs", let's talk about them honestly, for a change, shall we? Chemical and biological weapons are effective only if you have a massive delivery system, such as an army walking through a village spraying them on people. As a terrorist weapon, they are basically useless. As a point of comparison - the sarin gas attack in Japan killed TWELVE people and cost MILLIONS, while the 9/11 hi-jackers killed THOUSANDS using BOXCUTTERS. Clearly not much bang for the buck. So, Bush upped the ante, by knowingly lying about aluminum tubes and Nigerian yellowcake purchases.
Iran IS trying to build nukes, and we just gave them a powerful ally. Oops.
2006-08-16
02:57:39
·
11 answers
·
asked by
lamoviemaven
3
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
rmisbach - you seem to forget that Iran's Ahmadinejad was ELECTED to office, and he is the biggest thorn in our side. And Chavez in Venezuela was also elected. It is simple-minded to pretend that democracies are inherently better for our interests. Hitler rose to power in a democracy. The fact is, elections in the Middle East simply give the mullah with the biggest stick the most power. And that doesn't benefit us in the least.
2006-08-16
03:40:19 ·
update #1
blackscythe - funny, isn't it, how I was able to cite actual facts and use historic events to make my argument, while all you could do was talk about some vague "books" you've read, but are unable to cite....Sorry, but my reality trumps your land of make-believe....
2006-08-16
03:44:05 ·
update #2