InvestorsHub Logo
Followers 10
Posts 5029
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 07/29/2002

Re: hap0206 post# 242980

Thursday, 02/01/2007 5:53:06 PM

Thursday, February 01, 2007 5:53:06 PM

Post# of 495952
>>>is without any merit what-so-ever it is merely opinion based on hindsight about no STOCKPILES of WMDs<<<


You have it exactly backwards. The point is that there wouldn't be any reason to apply hindsight about WMD if Bush had allowed the inspection process to run its course. He yanked them out before they were done and then - after the invasion and the overthrow of SH - he sent his own team of inspectors led by David Kay in to validate his war which of course wasn't possible.

Can you think of another reason for Bush interrupting the inspection process other than fearing his main reason for going to war may have been crushed had he allowed the inspections to go on? (war as a last resort my ass)


>>>Every other factor for the overthrow of SH is still applicable<<<


Wrong again. As I showed you yesterday, paragraph (1) of the war resolution states Iraq must pose a threat to america for the resolution to be enforceable.


"SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and


http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/weekly/bliraqreshouse.htm


Note that the resolution states "continuing threat posed by Iraq; and.....not or any of the subsequent requirements. In other words, if Iraq doesn't pose a threat to the US it doesn't matter how rotten of a man SH is or how many UN resolutions he's ignored.
Join InvestorsHub

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.