View Single Post
Old 11-13-2002, 08:15 AM   #43
dave
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
jag & hermit -

Am I to infer what he meant? All I have to go on are his words, and his words very clearly implied that there was no link between Saddam Hussein and "recent islamic terrorism". I very clearly pointed out that there was. I don't care that it's not al Qaeda - he didn't <b>say</b> that.

Regardless, the "War on Terror" isn't about just al Qaeda anyway. It's one of the big fish, but not the only one. So it really doesn't matter whether or not Saddam is linked to al Qaeda, 'cause just focusing there is a pretty fucking narrow view on the whole thing.

I'll agree that there isn't a whole lot of anything linking him to al Qaeda (but again, I'm not ruling out the possibility either - I am not sold on a war against Iraq, but I could be, if appropriate evidence were presented). But the United States government has more of a purpose than simply "eliminate al Qaeda and its associates". The main purpose is (and should be) "protect the citizens of the United States of America". There are all sorts of threats out there, and the government needs to neutralize them. If Saddam is tied to al Qaeda, hey, great - another reason to go nail him. But it need not be the only reason.
  Reply With Quote