wolfva
10-01-2008, 07:41 AM
There's something I've noted about the far left. They despise the Iraq war. "Saddam had nothing to do with 911!" they scream. "There weren't any WMDs!" they cry. Yet, they're perfectly ok with the war in Afghanistan. Fact is, they complain that the Iraq war has distracted us from the 'real' war in Afghanistan. My question...WHY is invading Afghanistan deemed more just then invading Iraq??? I mean, Afghanistan and the Taliban had NOTHING to do with 911 either. Not only did they not have any WMDs (unlike Saddam who turned 2 dozen long range bio/chem missiles over prior to the invasion in the hopes of stalling it, was ordering enough castor beans to produce enough rycin to kill every insect in Iraq multiple times over and had recently lost a few dozen scientists and soldiers after a botched bio/chem loading excersize) they weren't even trying to get any. Heck, we know that Saddam was trying to get yellow cake from Nigeria, was ordering monkeys for his bio labs at a large rate (and specifically asked for sick monkeys) and the above mentioned castor bean shipments. Just about every major figure in the Clinton administration said Sadam was trying to get WMDs before Bush even began running for President, they repeated these claims before the invasion. And even Sadam said he had WMDS. Further, Saddam was paying bounties to the families of homicide bombers who killed US and Israeli citizens. Syrian and Iraqi TV would show the smiling Saddam presenting beaming parents with the oversized $40,000 checks.
So, let's repeat that. Afghanistan had no WMDs. They weren't trying to get WMDs. They had nothing to do with 911. They weren't actively supporting terrorism with bounties. After 911 they exiled Osama bin Laden under pain of death if he returned. They weren't killing the Kurds, or killing 100,000 of their own people a year. They weren't threatening their neighbors. They weren't flaunting UN Resolutions. Heck, they don't even have oil. So. Why was it justified to invade them? And why was it bad to invade Iraq when Saddam was doing all those things the Afghani's weren't?
So, let's repeat that. Afghanistan had no WMDs. They weren't trying to get WMDs. They had nothing to do with 911. They weren't actively supporting terrorism with bounties. After 911 they exiled Osama bin Laden under pain of death if he returned. They weren't killing the Kurds, or killing 100,000 of their own people a year. They weren't threatening their neighbors. They weren't flaunting UN Resolutions. Heck, they don't even have oil. So. Why was it justified to invade them? And why was it bad to invade Iraq when Saddam was doing all those things the Afghani's weren't?