Go Back   I-Mockery Forum > I-Mockery Discussion Forums > Philosophy, Politics, and News
FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #3  
mburbank mburbank is offline
The Moxie Nerve Food Tonic
mburbank's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: right behind you
mburbank has disabled reputation
Old Mar 22nd, 2004, 11:46 AM       
I don't know.

I agree that the presence of Nuclear weapons doesn't mean invade right away, or we would have done so in N. Korea. If the administration thought nukes meant you had to pre-empt than Pakistan would be in a lot more trouble right now.

I think it would change my position on the war dramatically though. It would change my mind that Iraq was a red herring. It would change my mind that the Iraq war was actively detrimental to US security.

I think the main thing about Blix and El Baradei is it chips away at the 'revisionist history' of the Bush administration who want US voters to believe that everyone agreed with us about Iraq, and that to whatever degree we were wrong about WMD, so was everyone else, and there was no real debate about what was going on in Iraq.

It wasn't that long ago, and I find this claim an insult to my intelligence, and typical of the administrations contempt for it's constituents.
Reply With Quote
 



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

   


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:49 PM.


© 2008 I-Mockery.com
Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.