Quote:
Originally Posted by dculkin
I'm sure he violated those terms nine ways from Sunday. I also assume that UN should have done something about it sooner. But how do those facts justify our invasion?
I would bet the trend in place in 2002-2003 would continue. IOW, time was on our side.
That's a risk we are taking. I don't see how the invasion reduced that risk.
No. The approach should have been to inspect. If he prevented access to any site, that site got destroyed. As it should have been since the cease fire.
|
The UN didn't want to do anything about it because they would have to use force. Several members with veto powers would not want to use force because they have investments in Hussein's government.
OK. Based on what? Guy stiffs you with a bad check many times. Why would you think this time would be different? Because you want to avoid a confrontation?
If he didn't have anything, it changes nothing. But if there was something and we didn't stop it and it came back, people would be upset again.
That we agree on. However, again, the UN wouldn't have gone along with it.