On Thu, 12 Oct 2006 14:23:06 -0400, Brice Yokem <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>Just theory, but how about these reasons.
>
>1)  Saddam played bait and switch with the inspectors to the point where
>the head of that effort quit.
Wrong. The inspectors didn't find anything and recall the words and 
statements from Blix. He was absolutely right.
>
>2)  Saddam had to be driven out of another country by military force to
>get him to leave, leaving another job to do.
like so many others
>
>3)  Saddam had used chemical weapons before.
yes, 10yrs before supplied and without consequences by Bush I.

>
>4)  He had cheated and cheated and cheated on agreements.
like so many others
>
>5)  The UN has a long history of failure at getting rogue nations to 
>behave themselves.
so george decides who he dislikes enough to start a war?
>
>6)  The CIA under George Tenant did a really careless job.
absolutely

>7)  Saddam had been asking for it for a long time.
true, but so do many others
>


so now according to some new studies we have over 650,000 civilians killed.
What a success, right. 
Of course George and friends deny this. The big planners !!!!

This is, what a british Army's chief of general staff thinks and says:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/meast/10/13/iraq.general/index.html

Dannatt, who took over as the Army's chief of general staff in August, said 
the U.S.-led coalition's plan to establish a democracy in Iraq that would 
be "exemplar for the region" is unlikely to happen.

"That was the hope. Whether that was a sensible or naive hope, history will 
judge," he said. "I don't think we are going to do that. I think we should 
aim for a lower ambition."

Dannatt's views directly contradict the position of British Prime Minister 
Tony Blair, who is a staunch supporter of the war and U.S. President George 
W. Bush's closest ally in the fight. 

But with the country edging nearer to civil war -- if not already immersed 
in it -- Dannatt said the strategy for implementing an Iraqi democracy was 
ill-prepared.

"I think history will show that the planning for what happened after the 
initial, successful war-fighting phase was poor, probably based more on 
optimism than sound planning," he said.

Dannatt said that Britain had essentially overstayed its welcome in Iraq.
* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *