How do you know he [Sadda,m] hasn't [already sold chemical weapons to terrorists]??
Before you go off on this paranoid tangent, please consider for a second that:
(1) These things have a shelf life of a few years in the best storage conditions. If he had sold chemical weapons to terrorists in the past decade, they would most probably be used by now.
(2) As I said, Saddam would not sell chemical weapons to Islamist terrorists, because he knows they don't like him and they don't like his regime, and in all likelihood, they would be used against him at the first chance. (If you have really been to the Middle East like you said you have, then you know this is true)
(3) As the Tokyo underground incident showed, where loonies used sarine gas to kill quite a few people in the subway, terrorist groups do not really need to buy chemical weapons from Saddam.
At this point, the important issue is whether invading Iraq will make this planet a safer place for Americans than before or not. Your administration says it will, trying to obscure the fact that there is no substantial tie between Iraq and terrorism. I believe not only will Iraq's invasion not help in making Americans safer, but will act as a catalyst in just the opposite direction, fueling anti-American hate among Muslims and helping in terrorist recruitment.
Would 9/11 have been averted if Iraq's proposed "regime change" was affected in 1991?
I do not think so. |
