OK did anyone have a BETTER plan how to deal with Saddam Hussein and his ongoing treaty violations?

Question

Keep in mind for 13 years Saddam stonewalled and played cat and mouse games with UN inspectors, was buying high tech weapons instead of food and medicine for his people, through France and Russia with the help of Koffi Annan's son, was a mass murderer both of his own people and foreign troops using weapons of mass destruction, and while contents of the truck convoy Russian special forces took out through Syria ahead of US ground forces were never inspected, we do know as undeniable fact that machinery tagged by inspectors before the invasion disappeared, sometimes along with facilities and topsoil. And we know now that Saddam had even aquired new MiG fighters that were buried in the sand, counting on France and Russia intelligence to notify him when we would begin our assualt. Also keep in mind Isreal has nuclear weapons and will use them if it feels in danger of being overwhelmed, or attacked with such, as Iraq, and now Iran, promise to do. So what was the better plan?

I'm not going to report anyone, I just want to hear what you believe the BETTER solution, the alternative plan, I didn't consider "doing nothing" as one of them, but after these responses I'm beginning to think so. North Korea is different, because since 1953 Red China has only gotten stronger, they have a love-hate relationship, we can't engage one militarily without risking war with the other, and China has strategically placed itself on all major waterways, as well as deeply vested in the American dollar. And it now appears the issue of nuclear proliferation is mute, the UN has bungled inspections and now everyone is seeking nukes or debating it, now we need to deal with issues of damage mitigation and legal culpability for use/distribution of said weapons.
ANYWAY - please focus, what would have been the better option if you were sitting in the oval office considering all factors?

Answer 1

OH yes the Democrats did, their plan consisted of a lot of please don't do those bad things and please don't hurt us!!

Answer 2

Continue to inspect and to apply pressure whenever need be, as well as surgical tactical strikes against his infrastructure when needed.

All legitimate investigations into the Iraqi War have concluded there were no WMDs in Iraq nor any good reason to suppose there were. This doesn't mean Saddam Hussein was a nice guy. He was a vicious tyrant. But he was a *contained* vicious tyrant who couldn't even get away with flying planes over parts of his own country!

Answer 3

We could have not have supported his coup to get into power in the first place. We could not have supported him through the Reagan years and in the begining of H.W. Bush's. We could not have given him WMD during the Iran-Iraq war. We could not have looked the other way when he used the WMD we gave him against his own people. We could not have been ambiguous in our statement regarding Iraq's policy towards Kuwait saying that 'we do not get invovled in Arab-Arab affairs'. We could not have used DU that destroyed the atmosphere around Iraq. We could not have lied about the threat posed by Saddam.

Answer 4

If I thought there was one little speck of evidence in your rant, I would believe you. It is filled with neo-con mouth pieces rantings and ravings and not credible at all. To answer your question, yes, G.H.W. Bush had a better plan which Clinton kept up on in his presidency. Saddam was contained and not a danger to anybody, not a threat to Israel, not a threat to the United States, no one, not anybody, get it. We have lost almost 3000 lives, the Iraqi I have heard anywhere from 150,000-655,000, many, many more wounded on both sides and deformed forever all for a war that was based on a lie, the very lies you are telling. Now we are involved in a civil war that we created and all for a lie, which my opinion was for personal gain of the criminal and corrupt president, and his buddy's. I bet this won't be a best answer but It is the truth, yours is not.

Answer 5

With that in mind when will we deal with North Korea? WILL we deal with North Korea? Or are you just gonna keep bitching and moaning over a dead issue? Saddam's on death row, Kim's in his palace. Iraq is an unstable war zone, even after the removal of Saddam they admittedly don't want us there, and yet North Korea, the place we should be, we haven't as much as embargoed.

Answer 6

because each of the smells intertwine at the same time as they practice dinner and scent reliable. it is not any longer puzzling to make nutrition scent reliable. it is extra sturdy to make nutrition style reliable. my friends are finished chinese i have self belief doubt they got here from u . s . a . yet their living house is a finished pig sty. theirs crap they convey living house from paintings throughout their the front backyard and reduce back backyard and it is all damaged such issues as tables, refrigerator, washing machines,etc.. yet specifically situations at the same time as they're cooking it smells quite reliable. yet i fantastically doubt it tastes that reliable. why? purely walk infront of their door step and also you may want to understand why theirs craps everywhere which incorporates lifeless plants/animals decaying like fish. Im effective they don't keep at a authentic food market both even if the community china city and each body in my state is time-honored with the china city isn;t very reliable for groceries because it is been regularly occurring to carry rats and it isn't even that tasty. that being stated do not allow the smells fool you.

Answer 7

leave him alone because that is the policy towards all of the other countries killing their civilians. Look at the genocides in Africa and tell me that Iraq needed more help than them.


Core, it was made to look like he had WMD's, he did not. GWB just wanted oil and to finish what daddy could not

Answer 8

Actually smartass, since it was believed to have WMD's that would have been stupid. Once again, the UN shows its ineffectiveness against Iraq and in Africa

Answer 9

No and because the UN failed the rest of the world, the US had to clean up their mess, as usual!!!

Answer 10

1. Kill him during the first Gulf War.
2. Stop fighting PC wars and kill people and destroy things.

Your logic is too much for liberals who live on emotion.

The way we deal with Iran and terrorists is what Reagan did. You can read my question on the Iran hostage situation.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=AvheRPuMQaxVvsMd4z9Cxp_sy6IX?qid=20061128202356AAJaRPA

Answer 11

I did but no one wanted to bomb them beyond the Stone-age!!