Glider Pilot Running for US President

When one responds to an attack like
9/11, it is not "starting" a war - that
war was started by the 9/11 terrorists -
regarding the Gulf War 2 - that war
was brought on by Saddam refusing
to abide by the agreements of the
surrender following Gulf War 1 - since
the UN could not agree to enforce
the existing agreements of the surrender,
the US took on that task with the help
of several other countries. Now Saddam
is removed from power, Kahn has
admitted his bad deeds in the past,
Lybia has given up its nuclear actions,
and IMHO the world is better off.
Before anyone points the finger at someone for "starting" a war - they
should look at what preceded the so-called starting of war. Of course
everyone has their own version based
on their own bias. You are entitled
to your own opinion - just like I am.
The true facts remain the same - only
the interpretation is different.

....and how far back you look for context.
A brief history of the US's flip-flopping Mid-East interventions can be
found he
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-159.html

Saddam was our boy against Iran. When he asked what the US would do if he
invaded Kuwait, the US ambassador to Iraq said, 'nothing, we won't intervene
in an inter-Arab dispute'. A week later he invades Kuwait and walks into
history's biggest sucker punch. But at the end of that war we flip-flop
again, turning a blind eye as Saddam solves his Kurdish problem with
chemical weapons (after we'd encouraged the Kurds to rise up against
Saddam).
Then, we invade again because he doesn't turn over the WMD that the UN
couldn't find but that Shrub insisted existed (CIA evidence to the
contrary). Turns out he couldn't turn them over because they didn't exist.
But hey, no apologies required--we'll stick around until you voluntarily put
in place a government we can control, er, I mean one that we agree with, er,
is democratic, er, as we define it...

The Taliban were our pawns against the Soviet Union. In the summer of 2001,
just months before 9-11, we paid the Taliban $43 million (
http://www.cato.org/dailys/08-02-02.html ).

Sorry.... I'll stop now. Wayyyyy off topic.

but it's sooo cloudy and drizzly here --weather reference = on topic

"RHWOODY" wrote in message
...
When one responds to an attack like
9/11, it is not "starting" a war - that
war was started by the 9/11 terrorists -
regarding the Gulf War 2 - that war
was brought on by Saddam refusing
to abide by the agreements of the
surrender following Gulf War 1 - since
the UN could not agree to enforce
the existing agreements of the surrender,
the US took on that task with the help
of several other countries. Now Saddam
is removed from power, Kahn has
admitted his bad deeds in the past,
Lybia has given up its nuclear actions,
and IMHO the world is better off.
Before anyone points the finger at someone for "starting" a war - they
should look at what preceded the so-called starting of war. Of course
everyone has their own version based
on their own bias. You are entitled
to your own opinion - just like I am.
The true facts remain the same - only
the interpretation is different.