Article: United States safer minus Saddam Hussein

A conversation:

"We should never have gone after Saddam Hussein."

"Why?"

"Because I don't think he had weapons of mass destruction.

"Should we be after Osama bin Laden?"

"Yes."

"Why? There's no evidence he has weapons of mass destruction."

"No, but he attacked us."

"So the only difference between Hussein and bin Laden is 9/11?"

"Yes."

"Ok. If we had been told by British and Russian intelligence and the CIA director that 9/11 was in the works, should we have launched a pre-emptive strike?"

"Of course."

"Bush was told by those sources that Iraq had WMDs. So either he should have ignored those warnings -- if you don't think we should have gone in -- or we were only justified to enter ...

Related newspaper, magazine, and journal articles:

 
 
Newsweek Harper's Magazine The Washington Post Chicago Tribune Crain's Chicago Business PRNewswire Pediatric News The Nation Advertising Age The Economist (US) A FREE trial gives you access to over 80 million articles! Access over 6,500 publications with a FREE trial!