Condoleeza Rice on Iraq
- January 23, 2003
- 2 comments
Condi lays it all down in the New York Times editorial section as to why we know Iraq is lying to the UN and US and why Iraq’s days of playing games are growing rapidly shorter.
When you read articles like this, and you watch documentaries on Saddam and his regime, it becomes almost unfathomable how people can be against removing Saddam from power. The guy is a sick, sadistic, murdering dictator. When you see signs at the anti-American march last weekend that read “At least Saddam was elected”, it makes you want to puke. Saddam uses fear and death to crush all opposition. He is the only known world leader who has PAID RAPISTS in his government. He uses torture devices that go against just about every rule the world has laid down. He orders his lackies to gouge the eyes of kids out in front of their parents in order to get what he wants from them. All of this has been witnessed by other Iraqis who have fled the country. And yet, the imbiciles on the far-left think we have no reason to go to Iraq and remove Saddam! I would love to see how they would respond after spending a few months there as an Iraqi citizen.
It’s pretty much time to say shutup and get out of the way to those who are so set against removing Saddam. And that goes for France and Germany too.
Chris
October 9, 2003
I don’t think the Bush cabinet lied about Iraq so much as they were given bad intelligence by people who were supposed to be in the know. There was a story on the Web a couple days ago (which was quickly buried though) that said the CIA was angry that the ex-Iraqis had given them so much bad intelligence. My personal take on that (if it’s true) is that the Iraqis just wanted someone, anyone to take out Saddam. And what better way than to lie about weapons of mass destruction? There had been plenty of evidence of their use by Saddam on video and documented by the UN. So why doubt the word of Iraqis who were in the places of leadership?
I don’t remember the Bush cabinet ever saying there was a tie between 9/11 and Saddam. In fact, they said just the opposite. In the very beginning, it was floated around as a possibility, but it was ruled out. I remember reading about it.
And in terms of links to al Qaeda, what we do know is that there were terrorist camps in Iraq. That’s all that mattered to me. Whether they were al Qaeda, Hamas, Islamic Jihad or Ali’s ber-thugs, I don’t care. Just wipe them out.
And I’m not sure where you got the idea that we would be out of Iraq by now. It takes a LONG time to rebuild a country that has been repressed for decades and that has never really known true freedom. Of course there will be resistance by thugs, there are Islamic radicals all in that region who are slobbering mad to kill the infidels! But the people of Iraq are free. That’s the main thing for me.
And please… give it up already about the last election. It’s a broken, whiny record now.
No one is really against removing Saddam. What those with brains on the left are against is the fact that we were all lied to in regard to the reason for attacking Iraq; i.e, weapons of mass destruction, ties to al qaeda, ties to sept 11. If the administration had come clean and told us we want to take him out because he is murdering his people that would be different. Weren’t we supposed to out of there by now? If this were Clinton people would be screaming impeachment again. The truth appears to be relative. Ah the truth. It seems this administration is not concerned with that. Nor was it elected, and should not be elected in 2004.