Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Mavdog
"since he had WMD's"?????
|
sit down, there's something you need to understand: there were no wmd's in iraq.
shocking news, eh?[/quote]
At the time. I was talking about historical context.
Quote:
when did zarqawi align himself with al queda? the date is put at october 2004.
the us invaded iraq in march 2003.
|
In afghanistan, he was there and injured in the US attack. See Hitchens statement.
Quote:
|
as for the "supporter of international terrorism", you apparently believe that support for the palestinian militants is cause for war.
|
Don't put words in my mouth, we are arguing specific points here, don't jump to conclusions. You asked me about him being a supporter of internation terrorism, Abu Nidal was certainly that. We can disagree about whether Hamas/Hezbollah Iranian proxies are international or not but don't change the points we are debating.
Quote:
should the us invade all the countries that support these groups?
if you say yes, how do you feel about invading saudi arabia?
|
does Saudia Arabia officially give 25K to suicide bombers? Do they officially harbor international terrorists? Do they have "known" WDM programs?
Quote:
the bottom line is attempting to justify the invasion of iraq based on iraq's supposed link to the terrorist who attacked the us is totally falacious.
iraq was not a part of the war on terrorism until the us brought that battle to iraq.
|
If you read carefully I'm not trying to do that, there were many reasons to invade iraq, links to al queda and international terrorism is just one of them. Al queda was in iraq, that's a fact. Invading Iraq to "get" Al Queda was not really a stated goal, only that the possibility that Iraq would provide WMD to terrorists was too great to wait for.
Edit: Edited for snarkiness.