Steven P. McNicoll wrote:
"George Z. Bush" wrote in message
...

Why not? They were defensive weapons, weren't they?


Iraq had just been defeated in a war that saw it invade one neighboring
state and threaten other states. Iraq did not need long range missiles to
defend itself.

Why not? It theoretically had no defenses after we finished with them in the
Gulf War. We permitted Japan to raise minimal military forces to defend itself
after WWII, and did the same with what was left of Hitler's Deutchland. Are you
inferring that Sadaam was somehow worse than Adolf and Hirohito and didn't
deserve to be allowed even minimal self defense?

You're obviously in denial and have been hung out to dry by your party line.
You need to walk away from this particular discussion, because you're never
going to win it.


If not, why did we allow
Yemen to get theirs from NK.....at least, that's what we said when he allowed
delivery to be completed?


Iraq agreed to conditions in a cease fire that prohibited it from having
these weapons. The same is not true of Yemen.