1  |   Order by index

Mar 7, 2003, 2:53pm

I've tried to stay out of this as best I can, since all this arguing
solves nothing (everyone's pretty much made up their mind one way or the
other), but I would just like to point out the following:

The train of thought in the Bush Administration has been, if Saddam
fully disarms (i.e. gets rid of *all* his WMDs, not just a couple
missiles), then we won't have to go to war. But, if he doesn't disarm
and we do go to war, then we'll be doing more than just trying to get
him to disarm; we'll also be trying to enact that "regime change"
everyone's been yakking about, because if Saddam won't follow the UN's
resolutions, even with the threat of war, then Bush believes he has to
be taken out of action, permanently.

[View Quote] --
Goober King
Permanent solution to a temporary problem
gooberking at utn.cjb.net

1  |   Order by index