Why The War Had to Start

Mike Savage, talk show host, expressed the theory that history for most of us starts when we were born. But for Democrats it started 20 minutes ago. In all of the talk about "patience" and "letting the diplomatic process work" the newspapers and msm seem to have completely forgotten that we had 200,000 troops sitting in Kuwait as the weather got hotter and the sand storm season came closer. Kerry's argument, forgetting this small fact, forgetting that Saddam did not allow the inspectors in until we had this force massed on his border, is, in and of itself proof that he is completely incompetent to be Commander in Chief


Amygdala: "Powerful as the US military is, the US, nor any conceivable coalition, cannot maintain an invasion force on the doorstep of Iraq indefinitely. Nor would it be politically sustainable by any of the involved countries.

So, the argument for the continuation of the inspection regime fails on this basis: it cannot, and would not, be continued indefinitely, or even for any significant length of time once the military threat against Iraq is withdrawn.

Which brings us back to the situation where Saddam Hussein, once again, in a few years time, if not sooner, is nuclear-armed, with missiles, and biological and chemical weapons.

And I don't see that as tolerable.

Reasonable people may, and do, disagree on this, and I remain entirely open to discussion of it, and introduction of facts and arguments I've not run in to, but right now, I don't see allowing Hussein, or his successors, to again arm himself to the point of such a threat, to be nuclear armed, as tolerable.

I point to North Korea as one example of some problems that would result.

The time when a regime has acquired such weapons and become such a threat is the time we call too late."