Quote:
Originally Posted by Cindy
Good grief. Think about the lives that were saved also.
|
Don't get me wrong, I firmly believe that Saddam had to be dealt with. But I feel we should have focused on bringing Osama bin Laden to justice. It's been proven that Saddam had no ties with al Queda, he saw them as a threat to his power. Iraq didn't attack us.
Here's my prediction... we'll leave Iraq a turbulent democracy. There will come a point when anti-American religious extremists will become very popular and will be elected to the highest offices of power and Iraq will become an even more serious threat and ally to terror than Saddam ever was. Just my concern.
But since this is about Clinton, I think it's important to note that after the 1993 WTC attacks (which killed six and injured 1,000) the United States brought the perpetrators to justice through international criminal law enforcement cooperation. Those behind the 1995 bombing in Saudi Arabia (which killed five U.S. military personnel) were also brought to justice through international law enforcement measures, prosecuted in Saudi Arabia, and were later beheaded by the Saudis. Those behind the bombing of U.S. embassies in Africa (which killed 224 and injured 5,000) were also brought to justice and are in prison today through international law enforcement cooperation.
My question for Bush would be, "You invaded two countries and spent billions and billions of dollars, draining the American economy... where's Osama bin Laden?"
Threaded Mode
