Quote:
Originally posted by sgtclub
There is an alternative scenario that doesn't involve false pretences - the administration in good faith believed Iraq had WMD, they were in the process of building a coalition to oust Saddam, and didn't want to waste political capital on a relatively (to Saddam) small fish.
|
I don't understand where this idea comes from that they would have had to "waste" political capital in order to waste this guy. Who was going to be upset? This was a terrorist group operating in Kurdistan, out of Saddam's control. The notion that someone would have seen this as an incursion on Saddam's sovereignty is laughable -- it was in the no-fly zone. "Small fish" to Saddam? No one is suggesting that this guy was allied with Saddam.
__________________
“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
|
