04-11-2003, 01:54 AM
I just read in USA Today and the Los Angleas Times that the Bush Administration viewed their victory over Sadams regime as "huge success", and the challenge of conforming Iraq into a Democratic society their ultimate goal.
However, when the US spoke in front of the UN with such zeal and conviction, they stated that their goal was to disarm Sadam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction. This being their publically stated goal, it seems more like a failure than a success to me. Perhaps we will never know how many, if any at all, weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, but it seems pretty clear to me that none were used on coalition forces or there would of been a great deal more casulaities. So I pose one question:
Did Iraq have enough weapons of Mass Destruction to be a real threat to America, and if not, what was this war really about anywayws?
However, when the US spoke in front of the UN with such zeal and conviction, they stated that their goal was to disarm Sadam Hussein of weapons of mass destruction. This being their publically stated goal, it seems more like a failure than a success to me. Perhaps we will never know how many, if any at all, weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq, but it seems pretty clear to me that none were used on coalition forces or there would of been a great deal more casulaities. So I pose one question:
Did Iraq have enough weapons of Mass Destruction to be a real threat to America, and if not, what was this war really about anywayws?
"The true value of a human being is determined primarily by the measure and the sense in which he has attained liberation from the self." -Albert Einsetin