"ONE CANNOT INFER FROM SADDAM'S NONINVOLVEMENT IN 9/11 THAT HIS REMOVAL ISN'T THE BEST WAY TO PREVENT ANOTHER 9/11."
One cannot infer that the violent removal of lots of people, who weren't involved in 9/11 and had no connection to it, wasn't the best way to prevent another 9/11, because WHO KNOWS (that's a pretty lousy argument)- and quite frankly there were much better candidates than Saddam, IF you really want to play a totally creative "what if" game as a basis for your preemptive violent removal of world leaders- is that the game you want to play? No need to answer- I don't really care what you have to say, after reading the rest of your post.
Your game would have been better played against Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, or many places in Africa (where terror money flows, and terror organizations grow and flourish).
I have nothing to learn from you, except the futility of dealing with the other "side" on these issues. There are knowledgeable people out there who hold a position different from my own, you just don't happen to be one of those people. I prefer to get my news and information sans global insults about "lliberals"- And I'm sure all other liberals do too. They probably feel the same way about your insults as you do about being called a pro-war baby killing fascist republican. No one who wanted to "teach" another person would approach a "student" in that way- unless they were supremely ignorant. Good luck to you- and if you ever want to "teach" someone again, try "teaching" without the insults. You might also want to have something to teach, but that's a fine point compared to the insult crap. I don't take that from anyone. |
