Kasz216 on 29 February 2008
| halogamer1989 said: I just have one thing to say to Dems who want immediate withdraw: they say that Iraq wasn't needed b/c the terror was in Afghanistan. Granted the Taliban was in control of Kabul and al-Qaeda using that nation as a base. However, when Saddam gassed his own Kurdish minority with sarin and anthrax WMDs, (WMD is not defined as solely nuclear), they wanted the US should stand still. Now the US was stupid in giving him those to fight Iran in the 80's. My point is they say that Iraq wasn't part of the War on Terror. Well unless the definition has changed, gassing your own citizens damn sure sounds like terror to me. |
In that case, we should start stationing marines in 4 year olds bedroom closets.
Someone has to keep the boogyman away.
The "war on terror" is supposed to mean terrorists, terrorists who are of imminant threat to us. Not just someone who is scary and not nice.
If that was the case and that's what the war on terror really was though, we shouldn't off been invading Iraq but instead the Sudan.
