Once again, where in my post did I say the invasion was justified? Just because I'm referring to justifications declared by el Presidente, et al doesn't mean I'm personally saying it was justified. Take an English course or two....
"Justifications were declared..." (implication is those with the power to direct policy were declaring justifications for action) "... as Saddam Hussein was impeding the UN Weapons Inspectors from effectively carrying out their work."
I do not see how the ultimate result would have been any other way? the demand made during this 'waiting' period was 'turn over Saddam' -- Umm, pretty silly demand. who actually expected him to comply?
Personal incredulity disproves nothing. And I have no recollection of anyone saying "turn over Saddam" during the waiting(?) period. I do remember that sort of demand being made of the Taliban in Afghanistan to turn over Osama.
Okay we have an impossible demand (an impossible demand is seen as No demand), then there is the violation to the U.N. for which the U.N. would seek remedy, then we have the WHOLE purpose of the war, suspicion of WMD's while N. Korea tells the whole world they have them.
so with this logic, the ultimate more favorable result would have been for Sadam to actually have WMD's and tell everyone, this way the war could have been avoided?
Well, there was a difference in the geopolitical situation between Iraq and its neighbors (largely antagonistic with no powerful supporters) and North Korea, a regional thorn, but nonetheless something of a "little brother" to the People's Republic of China. The immediate ramifications of jumping into a war with NK were more severe than that of Iraq. You can't launch a major conflict in China's (and Russia's) back yard and not have critical consequences, more critical, in my opinion, than what we've faced being embroiled in Iraq.
Archived topic from Anythingforums, old topic ID:3191, old post ID:58662