Re: Chat on Iraq

["Chris O'Connor" <sithasdbane@hotmail.com>]

All wars , obviously, start because one country attacks the other. If a 
nation belives that another nation is going to eventually attack it, then it 
is in that nations best interest to attack first. Weapons of Mass 
Destruction bring an even bigger element into the equation. Its one thing to 
have the Japanese hit Pearl Harbor and kill 3 thousand and a much bigger 
thing to have a suitcase nuke go off in Chicago and kill 500 thousand.

The case that the US government makes is this: 1. We believe that Iraq will 
attack us when they can (they do actually attack us on a a weekly basis) 2. 
Iraq has a history of using WMD (chem and bio) and are working on developing 
nuclear.

Other nations do not meet these criteria. China, an example you stated, does 
not have a history of using bio weapons on people, nor does it attack our 
planes and ships as Iraq does. I did 2 tours in the Gulf after the war when 
I was in the Navy, and as recently as 1999 when I was there last my ship was 
fired on by Iraqi missile batteries. When the first Gulf War ended we signed 
an armistice with Iraq, but they have not complied nor ceased hostilities, 
so you could say that we really havent ended the original war.



_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com