|
Frogmarch, Part 19
Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
Actually, he understands that whether or not there were WMDS is not a compelling question. We thought they were there, we took out Saddam Hussein, and is seems they were not there. End of story. Now that Saddam is gone and isn’t coming back it is irrelevant whether they were there when we went in.
It is just Democrats trying to score political points that make it a relevant issue. The only reason I would care if there were WMDs in Iraq is because it there were, it would give the Democrats less to scream about. :cussing: That is the only purpose it would serve. However, the point he was making is that even if there were WMDS the Democrats would still be screaming about something else. Therefore, from a practical standpoint (politically, strategically and tactically) the issue of whether or not there were WMDs in Iraq is irrelevant.
I agree.
|
The purported disloyalty of Democrats to the President under counterfactual circumstances isn't even a question -- it's partisan masturbation. So while the question of what actually happened in the real world re WMD is not particularly interesting any more, it is still more compelling than Slave's question.
__________________
“It was fortunate that so few men acted according to moral principle, because it was so easy to get principles wrong, and a determined person acting on mistaken principles could really do some damage." - Larissa MacFarquhar
|
