GAO Report: GA Security Threat

"Thomas Borchert" wrote in message
...

. . . I think the world was a better place when the most powerful nation
on
earth adhered to certain rules that had become standard between
civilized nations.

I can't see much of a difference for the world with Saddam missing (he
isn't, really, by the way). I am now absolutely certain - as most news
watchers - that Saddam didn't pose nearly the threat that some were led
to believe. There are no WMD, period. . .

Since this is an inappropriate forum for this topic - and since I don't
approve of crossposting, I will let this be my last word in this thread.

Iraq under Saddam was not abiding by international law. In the terms of
their surrender in the Gulf War, they agreed to disarm and to prove they had
done so. Their refusal to comply with those terms resulted in the resumption
of hostilities to force compliance. The existance or non-existance of WMD
has no bearing on the situation.

You have the floor.......

Rich S.

"Rich S." wrote in message ...


Iraq under Saddam was not abiding by international law. In the terms of
their surrender in the Gulf War, they agreed to disarm and to prove they had
done so. Their refusal to comply with those terms resulted in the resumption
of hostilities to force compliance. The existance or non-existance of WMD
has no bearing on the situation.


Iraq under US control has destroyed no WMDs nor shown proof that any
were destroyed.

Are we in violation of those UN sanctions now?

--

FF