On Dec 21, 2003, at 7:58 PM, James A. Donald wrote:
James A. Donald
Anyone who wants to argue that the guys in the two towers had it coming, and poor Saddam is a victim, puts himself in the corner with the people who are stupid, evil, and losers.
Jamie Lawrence:
Anyone who babbles such inane false relations is a dope.
You have just told us that poor little Saddam is a victim. Care to give us your take on the two towers?
Straw man. You keep bringing up the World Trade Center attack as if Saddam ordered it, or was involved in some central way. No credible evidence has been presented...not even the usually-unreliable sources...that Saddam was behind the 9/11 attacks. (Whether some Iraqis celebrated or not is beside the point...if that were the criterion for launching a war, we'd be at war with Syria, Egypt, France, China, and Malaysia, to name a few.) Going after the actual planners, financiers, and attackers involved in the 9/11 attacks is of course justified. "Liberating" Afghanistan and letting women in Kabul bare their legs and all was not justified (oh, and the women in Kabul are back to wearing scarves). Inasmuch as Iraq and the Baath regime was never linked in any credible or substantive way, beyond the merest of "maybe they met with Bin Laden's guys" rumors, and inasmuch as a 9/11 link was never even alleged by warmongers like Cheney and Perle and Rumsfield, the claim that Iraq was attacked because of the World Trade Center attack is ludicrous. You really are, down deep, a statist. You may have changed your stripes from supporting the Marxist variant of statism, but what you now support remains statism to the core. --Tim May