[Rhodes22-list] Political:Off to Iraq

[Brad Haslett]

Dave,

OK, I'll correct you.  You keep talking about alternatives.  What were they
before the invasion and what are they now?  The reference to Okinawa was a
reference to "cut-and-run" Murtha's statement that we could pull our troops
from Iraq and base them in Okinawa, then redeploy them from there if
necessary.  I did not blame the current situation on Clinton but merely
published a letter from Clinton to the House outlining his justifications
for an air strike.  His position from the letter is pretty clear.  The
Clinton administration recognized Saddam was not in compliance with UN
resolutions, was not cooperating with weapons inspectors, was a threat to
stability in the area, had WMD in the past and was seeking more, and should
be removed from power. Post 9/11, Bush carried the Clinton position one step
further and actually enforced the resolutions and removed Sadamm.

We took great care to minimize collateral damage during the invasion but bad
things happen to innocent people.  This is war.  Civilians show up for work
to sell widgets in tall buildings and get blown up instead, like in 1993 and
again in 2001 in NYC.  It is ugly stuff and should be avoided at all costs.
The current murder rate in Iraq is about four times the rate in Washington,
DC.  That's too high for both cities and is indeed tragic.

I have no problem staying on topic and I haven't forgotten what the subject
was, so once again Dave, what are/were these alternatives you keep talking
about?  Should we have sent Saddam a signed basketball from Michael Jordon
which worked so well with Korea?

Brad


On 10/25/06, DCLewis1 at aol.com <DCLewis1 at aol.com> wrote:
>
>
> Brad,
>
> I think you and I are posting about different topics, correct me if I'm
> wrong.  I was posting about Iraq.  I have never connected Okinawa  to
> Iraq.
> Perhaps I missed your post making that connection.   Regarding the Bush
> Administration "just pulling the trigger" on the Clinton  Administrations
> position -
> again, I assume you're talking about Iraq - it's one  thing to have a
> position
> against Saddam Hussein, it's another thing to kill  100,000 Iraqis (none
> of whom
> are Saddam Hussein) and destroy their  economy.  I think it's a huge
> stretch
> to try to blame the  Iraq debacle on Clinton.
>
> Dave
> __________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>