[geeks] Religion and the Presidency

[Lionel Peterson]

>From: hike <mh1272 at gmail.com>
>Date: 2008/05/30 Fri PM 01:15:36 EDT
>To: The Geeks List <geeks at sunhelp.org>
>Subject: Re: [geeks] Religion and the Presidency

<snip>

>There have been several news reports lately that Saddam continued to promote
>the idea that Iraq had WMD to keep Iran at bay.  These reports were part of
>the evidence that Bush, et al, considered.
>
>When your enemy says he has <insert_your_most_terrifying_weapon_her>, you
>have to take this into consideration when planning your next move.

Agreed.

>Saddam overplayed his hand and brought about his own overthrow and death.
>This was Saddam's fault.  It was not the fault of the USA government that he
>was believed.  Saddam could have informed the USA government what the real
>story was but he did not.
>
>Bush considered this as evidence in making his decision.

He would have been a fool no matter how he considered the evidence, I fear - 
if he held back because "Saddam is a liar" he would have been crucified, if he 
acted on Saddam's words, then... Well, you know...

>One must also recognize that the US News Media nor Democrat politicians
>define the term "WMD".  The UN is the official holder of the term from my
>understanding.  Both US groups have succeeded in changing the definition of
>the USA commoners in an effort to bash Bush.

Yes, the definition of WMD has been a moving target, esp. after certain selct 
items that did meet official criteria were reported to have been found 
("That's not a *real* WMD...")

>Saddam continued to keep weapons that were included in the UN's definition
>of WMD.  He used them in Desert Storm II.  The Scud missile that was fired
>into Kuwait (and landed beside a strip shopping center according to the
>released photo) was a WMD.  Don't laugh--that is, unless you want to laugh
>at the UN, et al.  Rocket shells were found in Iraq that were primarily for
>the dispersal of toxic material against an enemy.  It was illegal under that
>agreement for Iraq to have the capability to deliver toxic materials and
>such weaponry were deemed WMD.
>
>In a whole of Democrats, accountants, attorneys, and bureaucrats, one must
>consider the actual definition of WMD  before making the statements that the
>USA media and Democrats make.  It appears to me to be a convenient
>forgetting since I learned about this through USA news media reports  after
>Desert Storm I.
>
>HTH
>Have fun!

Always.

Lionel