[QUOTE=Revenant Threshold]
Why not just, uhm, fix the sanctions?
[/QUOTE]
Because that would make sense, and that is not the American Way[sup]TM[/sup]! Jeeze, don’t you Brits know anything? It’s bad enough you guys keep sticking unnecessary vowels in words and spelling NASA as Nasa, can’t you at least get the basics right? 
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]
Please give me your opinion of the state of the sanctions by late 2002.
[/QUOTE]
Congratulations on successfully changing the subject away from the asshole Republican who was caught saying in public that he would welcome another devastating attack on his own people because of the positive effect it would have on his own political fortunes. Kudos, fuckface.
[QUOTE=Cervaise]
Congratulations on successfully changing the subject away from the asshole Republican who was caught saying in public that he would welcome another devastating attack on his own people because of the positive effect it would have on his own political fortunes. Kudos, fuckface.
[/QUOTE]
I prefer to look at it like this. We went from talking about one crazy, detatched from reality, hyper-partisan statement to talking about multiple such statements.
[QUOTE=Miller]
It’s also hard to produce evidence that Republicans aren’t shape-shifting space lizards, but this is generally not taken as proof that GOP headquarters is located on Sigma Draconis.
[/QUOTE]
Uh-oh
[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves]
Why not, um, go get Zarqawi? Or, um, send the Marines *into * Tora Bora with Bin Laden pinned down there? Is there a reason other than needing boogiemen to scare us with?
[/QUOTE]
Huh? I was talking about Iraq and Hussein. Deal with them through the sanctions, but sure, send the large men with guns after Bin Laden and Zarqawi. Please do.
[QUOTE=Cervaise]
Congratulations on successfully changing the subject away from the asshole Republican who was caught saying in public that he would welcome another devastating attack on his own people because of the positive effect it would have on his own political fortunes. Kudos, fuckface.
[/QUOTE]
No no no. He’s one ‘Valued Conservative Voices’ that is so valued around here. Why, without him and Lil’Rick’s legal tap dancing, where would we be?
Besides, if you keep being mean to him we’ll have to endure Maudlin Moto’s Farewell Telethon. Again.
-Joe
[QUOTE=Merijeek]
Besides, if you keep being mean to him we’ll have to endure Maudlin Moto’s Farewell Telethon. Again.
-Joe
[/QUOTE]
NO! Not after all he’s done to try to break us from our hardened partisan positions! NOOOOOO!
[QUOTE=Mr. Moto]
The Republicans put their political interests aside in the 1940s in order to win a war. This likely cost them some elections, but it was the right thing to do, and had the happy benefit of marginalizing the isolationists. The Democrats didn’t do this now, in the case of Iraq.
The result is that an antiwar faction that ought to have similarly been marginalized, in my opinion, was strengthened.
[/QUOTE]
The Democrats set aside their political interests after 9/11 to support a war against someone who actually attacked us . They were rewarded by Bush using 9/11 for partisan purposes, of course.
Spain in 1942 was a fascist state, full of WMDs. If FDR decided to invade, giving priority to disposing of Franco, and the Republicans objected, would they have been wrong?
As for the sanctions. Saddam siphoned money off. What a shock! If we invaded everyone who stole aid money, we have armies in 35 countries and Alaska. The question is, what did he use the money for? Paying the army? That was something maybe we should have done after the invasion also? Building palaces? Putting it into his Swiss Bank Account? Those are sure causes for war. One thing we know he didn’t do with it is build WMDs
because there weren’t any!!!