The biggest problem I see so far is this conflict over whether or not the Kurds were Saddam's people. Lets say for a moment that they were not, for Duke's sake. Then, when Saddam gassed them to test out his various WMDs, he was attacking a seperate group of people who were not Iraqis, correct? If so, then they must have had their own soveriegn nation for them not to be Iraqis, as they lived in Iraqi. Therefore, what Saddan did wa an act of war against another soveriegn nation, which means that the U.S. and its allies were justified in ending a military campaign aimed at another nation with the possibility of sending the whole region into war. Hello, does Desert Storm ring a bell? Saddam invaded and we took him out. This is practically the same. He attacked what you Duke are calling a seperate soveriegn people, and therefore justified our attack. Besides, it doesn't really matter if they are considered Iraqis or not...He still attack another group of people with no justification or provocation, and was a threat to those around him. Get a clue here!
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
