No, surely not supporting Saddam in the first place was the right idea?
Not supplying his regime with weapons, technology and even satellite reconnaisance when he was gassing the Kurds was the right idea.
Not encouraging the invasion of Kuwait was the right idea.
Not supporting other dictators still, many of whom make Saddam look like a pussycat, is the right idea.
Not lying about WMDs was the right idea.
Not lying about links to Al Quaeda was the right idea.
Not invading a sovereign country in an unprovoked attack was the right idea.
Not vetoing plans to bring Osama bin laden to the World Court (twice -- Clinton in 1997 and Bush in 2001) was the right idea.
ok?
Tell me, was 'getting Saddam' worth killing 100's of 1000s of civilians? (that's those who died as a direct result of military action, not counting those who have died through lack of drinking water, food, housing etc caused by indiscriminate bombing.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
no subject
Not supplying his regime with weapons, technology and even satellite reconnaisance when he was gassing the Kurds was the right idea.
Not encouraging the invasion of Kuwait was the right idea.
Not supporting other dictators still, many of whom make Saddam look like a pussycat, is the right idea.
Not lying about WMDs was the right idea.
Not lying about links to Al Quaeda was the right idea.
Not invading a sovereign country in an unprovoked attack was the right idea.
Not vetoing plans to bring Osama bin laden to the World Court (twice -- Clinton in 1997 and Bush in 2001) was the right idea.
ok?
Tell me, was 'getting Saddam' worth killing 100's of 1000s of civilians? (that's those who died as a direct result of military action, not counting those who have died through lack of drinking water, food, housing etc caused by indiscriminate bombing.)