Originally Posted by i get high sometimes

You do realize that it was the United States who put Saddam Hussein in power in the 1960's and we were the ones giving him military and monetary aid while he was commiting the atrocities that qualify him as a 'dangerous dictator'.

i guess ill actually reply to each part of this.

1. he was not a threat to the world, polls indicate that he wasn't even a threat to the kuwatis, a people who had already been invaded by him once. he was a fledgling dictator living off of decades old American aid.

I believe any dictator in this world, whether they live in a **** hole of a country or not, is a potential threat. Maybe not now.... well, especially not now since he's dead, but give him a little leg room and a couple years and see.

2. er, conquest for the greater good? what is the greater good in all of this? 100,000 iraqis dead? increased threat of terrorism? i'm missing this greater good.

I'm talking about war in general. By conquest for the greater good, this could mean waging war with a dangerous nation and trying to conquer them before they can conquer other nations, or for imperialistic gain, which would be for the greater good of the country conquering and taking over nations rather than the whole world.

Of course, as you can see, there is a problem with the latter reason, especially in this time and age.

3. saddam hussein had no al queda connections, a point which has been conceded by the bush administration, are you still basking in that hollow justification?

I believe in whatever I believe in, whether it be based on facts, conjectures of my own, or just figments of my own quirky imagination. If that discredits my argument, so be it. But no, I don't listen to anything Bush or his administration say.

About you being glad that we started it because no one else had the will to do it. are you up on your historical facts much? i guess you don't recall the Shi'ite uprising in the early 90's which would have very likey overthrown Saddam from power, but was crushed with US authorization and assistance. I think that those shia muslims had the will to overthrow saddam, the only problem is that the US wouldn't let them do it. so i guess your whole "we were the only ones with the will to do it" argument is kaput. We were the only ones with the will to do it because we were the only ones who were painting him as this grave threat to world security. the rest of the world could see through our bullsh*t, and realized that saddam was not an imminent threat.

Ok, you got me there. I wasn't aware of any uprising in the 90's. I was refering to right before the war started. And again, I believe any dictator in this world is a potential threat. Even if the world didn't see Saddam as one, I did, and the US did apparently. Whether they were painting him as a threat or not is irrelevant.