Should Saddam go on Trial

[jon_forward]

Ok, Listen up maggots! This is one of your Marines talking. First Off we did not, Repeat not go into Iraq with the primary mission of finding any WMD. Our Primary mission was Regime change. With that being said, we did take every opportunity to look for sites that might have had any WMD or industrial chemicals, we had well over 300 sensitive sites identified prior to kick off. What that means is we had detailed information, satelite photos and in some cases, HUMINT. As I am still on active duty and the situation there is not yet where we would all like it to be I can not really add to much more. I deployed for 490 days in support of OEF/OIF (Egypt, Kuwait,Iraq) so I have first hand knowledge of what we were actually doing for our Mission.

 

[Annie]

Hey Jon, thanks and Merry Christmas, Happy New Year.

 

[NightTrain]

Hey, Jon, please extend my thanks to your brother & tell him I said 'God Bless'.

If you and your brother are looking to adventure when he gets back, I'd be more than happy to take you both Salmon fishing here in Alaska & show you around my part of the State.

I'd love nothing more than to buy him a beer & hear his first hand stories.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Jon, I remember a speech by president bush about a week or two before the war commenced and almost every answer provided by the president had to do with iraq having WMD's.

I would venture to say that at least half of the population of this country believes the war was based on the WMD issue because of the words of this administration.

People can try to 'rewrite history' all they want to and most likely a majority will join the revisionists but I know what I heard, and that was that hussein could sell WMD's to terrorists who wish to do harm to the US, therefore making iraq an imminent threat to the national security of the US.

 

[jimnyc]

G'mornin, DK!

I don't think anyone is denying what was said pre-war. I think even the conservatives want to know how the intel was not up to par. This intel was provided by many countries and they all came to the same conclusion - that he had WMD or was in the process of making them. Some differed as to what his danger was and his ability to actually use them.

I think what's being said is that wasn't the primary reason for invasion. The primary reason was regime change, and the WMD was just one reason of many as to why this needed to take place. Intel showing that he had them or was making them and him not being forthcoming with inspections makes for a terrible mixture.

This guy had to be dealt with and he was. If he had the WMD, the threat would have been removed. If he didn't have them, any future threat from him has been removed.

Was the WMD angle highlighted prior to invasion? It sure was. And you would have done the same thing if you had the intel in front of you.

It's a shame that the WMD, or lack of, has taken front stage on this war - because I truly believe this guy needed to be removed regardless. Pretty much the entire world sees Saddam's removal/capture as a good thing.

 

[jon_forward]

point taken Dk, that post was by my twin bro,28 plus years in the marine corp soon to retire with 29 years in. his post brings a current military view ,albeit short , that is just about 100% shared with all the folks over there putting their asses on the line so we can enjoy life as we now know it. jimmy is a senoir staff nco dealing with nuclear,biological and chemical defense. I cannot post anything to back up the statements made but I have no reason not to believe what my bro has said here. The #1 proirity for the military was regime change. I would say mission accomplished.