http://images.google.com/imgres?img...v=/images?q=Saddam+Hanging&svnum=10&hl=en&lr= http://images.google.com/imgres?img...ing&start=100&ndsp=20&svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&sa=N
Saddam didn't have any WMD's or WMD programs. His regime refused to work with or harbor Al Queda, or other Islamic radicals. Now what we have is a failed state on the verge of collapse - no coherent Government, no security apparatus and no infrastructure. Iraq is now a playground for Islamic radicals and terrorists. The National Intelligence Estimate confirmed we created more terrorists than existed preinvasion. Less safe. DUH!!!
Court Rules: Al Qaida, Iraq Linked NEW YORK, May 7, 2003 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/05/08/uttm/main552868.shtml (CBS) A federal judge Wednesday ordered Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein and others to pay early $104 million to the families of two Sept. 11 victims, saying there is evidence â though meager - that Iraq had a hand in the terrorist attacks. James E. Beasley, a Philadelphia lawyer who brought the case,... A different law suit: $1 Trillion Suit Claims Iraqi Officials Knew Of Bin Laden Terror Plans Sept. 5, 2002 http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/09/05/september11/main520874.shtml The suit, filed Wednesday on behalf of 1,400 victims of the Sept. 11 attacks and their families, also claims Iraq sponsored terrorists for a decade to avenge its defeat in the Gulf War. Jim Kreindler, one of the lawyers bringing the litigation http://www.law.columbia.edu/law_school/communications/reports/summer2005/911_part2 James Kreindler '80: For the past 17 years, he has worked on the case surrounding the 1988 bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland, in which Libya agreed to pay $2.7 billion to relatives of those killed. http://www.husseinandterror.com/ Saddam Hussein knew plenty about terrorism. In essence, he owned and operated a full-service general store for global terrorists, complete with cash, diplomatic aid, safe haven, training, and even medical attention. Such assistance violated United Nations Security Council Resolution 687. At a minimum, we know that Saddam Husseinâs government supported terrorism by paying "bonuses" of up to $25,000 to the families of Palestinian homicide bombers.âPresident Saddam Hussein has recently told the head of the Palestinian political office, Faroq al-Kaddoumi, his decision to raise the sum granted to each family of the martyrs of the Palestinian uprising to $25,000 instead of $10,000,â Aziz, announced at a Baghdad meeting of Arab politicians and businessmen on March 11, 2002, Reuters reported the next day.8 Abu Nidal, Iraqi-supported terrorist lived comfortably in Iraq between 1999 and August 2002. As the Associated Press reported on August 21, 2002, Nidalâs Beirut office said he entered Iraq âwith the full knowledge and preparations of the Iraqi authorities.â Abu Nidal Organization â a Palestinian terror network behind attacks in 20 countries, at least 407 confirmed murders, and some 788 other terror-related injuries. So far, we have documented that Saddam Hussein harbored terrorists (many with al-Qaeda links) responsible for international mayhem and even the incidental deaths of Americans. But is there any evidence that Iraq sheltered those responsible for attacks on America? Enter Abdul Rahman Yasin. This Indiana-born, Iraqi-reared terrorist remains wanted by the FBI for his role in the February 26, 1993 World Trade Center attack. President Bill Clinton's Justice Department indicted Yasin for mixing the chemicals in the bomb that exploded in the parking garage beneath the Twin Towers Soon after the smoke cleared, Yasin returned to Iraq. Coalition forces have discovered documents that show he enjoyed housing and a monthly government salary. According to dissidents, journalists who have visited, and even United Nations weapons inspectors, Saddam Hussein appears to have offered training to terrorists, in addition to funding, diplomatic help, safe haven and medical care.
How about a source a bit more credible than the National Review Online - a well-known Neocon rag? Senate report: No Saddam, al-Qaida link Long-awaited analysis also finds that anti-Saddam group misled U.S. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14728447/ WASHINGTON - Thereâs no evidence Saddam Hussein had ties with al-Qaida, according to a Senate report issued Friday on prewar intelligence that Democrats say undercuts President Bushâs justification for invading Iraq. Bush administration officials have insisted on a link between the Iraqi regime and terror leader Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. Intelligence agencies, however, concluded there was none... It discloses for the first time an October 2005 CIA assessment that prior to the war Saddamâs government âdid not have a relationship, harbor, or turn a blind eye toward Zarqawi and his associates.â
Why would Saddam not have supported terrorism? Are there any Middle East countries not supporting terrorist activities against the US? Even Saudi Arabia, one of the US's closest "ally on the war on terror" is supporting terrorism. Your post said Saddam had absolutely no ties to any terrorists. Do you believe what polititicians have found or what a federal judge has found? Political reasons trump any evidence. Just before the elections and now, (your Sept. 8, 2006 MSBNC Article) no politician wants to be associated with Bush because of the unpopularity of the invasion of Iraq. "What about my political career?" Dissassociate from Bush, damage control, evasion. The Senate has rewritten history to satisfy their political careers, Rep or Dem alike. The politicians on both sides have gotten us into a fine mess, now they evade the truth. The Iraqi war was popular at first, 75% of Americans supported the war on the first day of the invasion, then things went bad. It's not what the voters want now. The people have changed their minds. What about the sources Reuters, Associated Press, Saddam's and Aziz' bragging mouth, CBS news, United Nations inspectors, Iraqi dissidents, journalists, etc. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Nidal_Organization Abu Nidal, or "father of the struggle," [4] was regarded as the world's most ruthless terrorist leader. [5] Abu Nidal was based over the years in Iraq, Syria, Libya, and Egypt, and is believed to have ordered attacks in 20 countries, killing or injuring over 900 people. [6] Abu Nidal died of between one and four gunshot wounds in Baghdad in August 2002, believed by Palestinian sources to have been killed on the orders of Saddam Hussein, [8] but said by the Iraqi government to have committed suicide. It might take another 10-15 years, but I bet attorney James Kreindler will find more than enough evidence. By then no one will care.
bs neocon propaganda. after investigating every possible link [and finding absolutley nothing] cia went back a whole 10yrs in search of any connection to obl and found none. look at the videos posted by kc on the cheney thread to get a clue.
If you don't consider Saddam's support of Hamas and it's suicide bombers in Israel to be in violation of the 1991 U.N. Resolution..... http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/sres/sres0687.htm 32. Requires Iraq to inform the Security Council that it will not commit or support any act of international terrorism or allow any organization directed towards commission of such acts to operate within its territory and to condemn unequivocally and renounce all acts, methods and practices of terrorism;" His support of terror is well documented. Here's just some of the 41,000 hits that Saddam Hamas suicide and "$25,000" find....... " http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2846365.stm http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/14/world/main543981.shtml http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchiv... Support for and Encouragement of Palestinian http://www.intelligence.org.il/eng/bu/iraq/iraq_f_a.htm http://www.guardian.co.uk/israel/Story/0,2763,912938,00.html http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,58871,00.html
The question was not "Was Saddam a bad man?" The question is, are we safer now? Are there more trained terrorists now than before Bush's war against Saddam's regime? Is there more or less hatred now toward the USA? Is there better or worse relations with other countries? Yes, Saddam was a bad man, but from a cost benefit analysis, are we safer now and was it really worth it? People are celebrating the demise and death of Saddam...but at what cost both near term and long term to the USA? Would the USA be in better shape if the money had been spent internally, not to mention the dead and wounded Americans?