To: Thomas M. who wrote (1854 ) 10/1/2002 8:14:57 PM From: Brumar89 Respond to of 8683 The issue I raised is valid. If you truly believe the US created Saddam and gave him his WMD's as you've stated, why wouldn't you also consider it the US's responsibility to remove him? It's not surprising that you can't understand this. It's not surprising you are unable to answer the question. The British were putting military equipment on civilian ships. They were putting American flags on British ships with military equipment. Germany never targeted America. Even a biased person should be able to recognize that you can't tell what is on a ship by looking through a submarine periscope. When Germany began sinking American ships it was in violation of the Sussex pledge. lib.byu.edu It is thus apparent that when the Germans practically demanded, as a price of their abstention from indiscriminate submarine warfare, that Mr. Wilson should move against Great Britain in the matter of the blockade, they realized the futility of any such step, and that what they really expected to obtain was the presidential mediation for peace. President Wilson at once began to move in this direction. On May 27th, three weeks after the Sussex "pledge," he made an address in Washington before the League to Enforce Peace, which was intended to lay the basis for his approaching negotiations. It was in this speech that he made the statement that the United States was "not concerned with the causes and the objects" of the war. "The obscure fountains from which its stupendous flood has burst forth we are not interested to search for or to explain." This was another of those unfortunate sentences which made the President such an unsympathetic figure in the estimation of the Allies and seemed to indicate to them that he had no appreciation of the nature of the struggle. Though this attitude of non-partisanship, of equal balance between the accusations of the Allies and Germany, was intended to make the President acceptable as a mediator, the practical result was exactly the reverse, for Allied statesmen turned from Wilson as soon as those sentences appeared in print. The fact that this same oration specified the "freedom of the seas" as one of the foundation rocks of the proposed new settlement only accentuated this unfavourable attitude.