Re: Paul O'Neil
The question has always been, was Saddam a threat to the US or our allies? The answer is, at the time of war, no.<br />You can speculate all you want, but the reality was that even if he had WMD's, he had no way to deliver them. He was in a box--All of the quotes Ladyfish posted were good reasons to impose sanctions on Iraq, good reasons to force the inspectors back in, good reasons to keep the pressure on him, while we went after the true threat to the US, namely Osama and alqada and other terrorist groups around the world.<br /><br />Even that noted left wing institution, the Army War college, published a paper suggesting that invading Iraq stretched our military too thin, was poorly planned, with unrealistic goals.<br /><br />The reality in Afghanistan currently reflects this, in that the warlords have virtually retaken the country, drug revenues are rampant, and there is no semblance of control there.<br /><br />And while you may think that somehow conquerring Iraq is making us safer, but the reality is the next huge crisis the US will face, excluding North Korea, will be in Pakistan--if Sharif loses power--and there has been several assassination attempts recently, Pakistan is going to be a huge problem for the US that will have been solidified by our actions in Iraq, and they do have WMD's, including nuclear and the capability to deliver them--All likely to fall into terrorist's hands--with the support of the Pakistani military and people.<br /><br />And unlike Saddam, that is something that is truly a situation to worry about.<br /><br />Oh, and I joke all the time. When there is a reason to joke. This ain't it!