Glynch, is there absolutely no evidence that, short of a nuclear bomb destroying Houston, will convince you that there may be a need to use force with Sadam. You seem to assume that since Iraq probably can't do harm to us here in Houston, that they are of no threat to the US. You don't seem to understand that there are US citizens living all over the world (including the middle east) that can be affect by sadam and Iraq. Just b/c they can't take out the mainland, does not mean they are not a threat to national security.
You don't seem to understand that there are US citizens living all over the world (including the middle east) that can be affect by sadam and Iraq. Many of the folks in the oil companies are very worried. They are alrady at increased risk and have been for the last year while Bush pushes for war. They are the one who will be subject to the increased terrorism and anti-Americanism for years that many predict will be the result of this unilateral invasion. I know Tony is with us (probably regrets it as his political career is toast) and we've got Bulgaria and Spain who is opposing a 90% majority. Deny if you want but the whole world knows that this is Bush and America's war alone.
Question: If Saddam uses chemical/biological weapons during this upcoming war, then will the US be vindicated because they had what we said they had all long? Seems like he really loses if he exposes his hand. Then, what will all the countries and people who didn't think war was necessary say? The problem is if he hits our troops or whomever with those WoMD...then we don't have those same weapons to hit back with and the nuke option is not really an option due to all the Iraqi people who would perish. We should hit back just as hard. Someone hits me with gas or microbes, then I want to hit back harder. How would we step it up? Just continue as if it didn't happen?
Seems like he really loses if he exposes his hand. Then, what will all the countries and people who didn't think war was necessary say? I would think they what they have been saying all along - that he wouldn't use WMD unless attacked (ie, that he could be contained).
grinch, I mean glynch, I used to almost, semi-, sort of enjoy the debate your posts used to stir up. But lately, no wait, for a while now, all your posts have been useless, baseless, sarcasm and what you might want to believe as wit. The fact is that this clone, I mean drone, could in fact be used in a battlefield type situation, or possibly could be flown to Kuwait to spread chemical, biological weapons on troops, or anyone for that matter. What else is it built for? Camel dusting? Why would you bring up the fact that it couldn't do anything to you in your cubicle in Houston??? If it's used to deploy chemical or bio weapons, does it really matter what country it's used in?? There's 0% objectivity in 100% of your posts.
Question: If Saddam does not use chemical/biological weapons during this upcoming war, then what is up with that? Does W get to say "My Bad"? Does Saddam get to keep his job? Will the unwashed masses get a bigger tax cut to make us forgot this whole Iraq WMD thingy?
Just to clarify, are you talking about the real evidence or the manufactured evidence? This might matter to Glynch.
