Opinions differ among Middle East experts and former government officials about the pre-Iraqi tilt, and whether Washington could have done more to stop the flow to Baghdad of technology for building weapons of mass destruction.
"It was a horrible mistake then, but we have got it right now," says Kenneth M. Pollack, a former CIA military analyst and author of "The Threatening Storm," which makes the case for war with Iraq. "My fellow [CIA] analysts and I were warning at the time that Hussein was a very nasty character. We were constantly fighting the State Department."
2007-09-11 18:06:49 · 3 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I see no where in this article where it says we helped. It simply says we didn't hinder. Do you feel we should have attacked Iraq back then and stopped it? What exactly is your point. You think we should have went to war sooner? Also I thought you said he had no WMDs? You really should get your logic flow in place before attempting to argue don't you think?
2007-09-11 18:14:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The USA supported Saddam all the time he was at war with Iran and protected his ships in the Gulf.
2007-09-11 18:39:48 · answer #2 · answered by brainstorm 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Agreed. Saddam, like the kafirs Reagan and Bush, did not support the holy jihad of al Qaeda.
Go Hillary!
2007-09-11 18:12:52 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋