The Logic Off Topic list

That's what he said in an interview a few days ago when asked.

> From: GAmoore@...
> Reply-To: logic-ot@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Sun, 23 Sep 2001 00:05:39 EDT
> To: logic-ot@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [L-OT] OT Goodbye / Hussein
> 
> Thats not what I heard. The Arab coalition wouldn't agree to invading
> Bagdad - although no army stood in the way of the American and British
> armies. They expected and believed that the Iraqi people would rise up
> and revolt. There were isolated rebels in the south and the Kurds in the
> north. Unfortunately, the US and England didn't defend them sufficiently
> and it died out. It takes a real army to defeat that bastard, not a bunch
> of ragtag desserters and shop keepers.
> 
>>> Because dropping Saddam would have meant the fundamentalists would
>>> have come to power.  Choosing between two evils...  And so after our
>>> oil-supply has been secured (Gulf-war), Saddam is now allowed to
>>> terrorize his own people, while the western world sits back and does
>>> nothing...
>> 
>> The reason Colin Powell gave was that they didn't want to occupy the country
>> long term, and that they felt they would have to do that to stabilize it if
>> they took out Saddam.  Makes sense, if only from a purely operational
>> view....
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>