Quote: Originally Posted by JLM
...only an idiot would assume Saddam didn't have W.M.D.s, about as stupid as assuming a crocodile doesn't have teeth.
Since Iraq did not possess WMD stockpiles in 2003, your assumption that Hussein had WMDs would be wrong.
Assuming that someone is innocent of accusations until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt isn't stupid. FYI, this concept was
the foundation of our criminal justice system. Now we just assume people are guilty and shoot them and anyone else who gets in the way.... or torture them for years without due process. Eventually we'll be convinced to lynch and torture child molesters, then murderers, then rapists, then selling drugs, until eventually we don't need lawyers or judges, only prosecutors. Why waste time and money on guilty people who commit horrendous crimes?
In the case of Iraq, the "assumption" or more accurately the "lie" that Iraq possessed stockpiles of WMDs led to a war which killed hundreds of thousands of innocent people and made millions of others homeless refugees. The point of the invasion was never about WMDs but using American military power to seize control of Iraq's oil wealth for the benefit of oil companies. The American people got stuck with the trillion dollar cost of the war and people close to Bush made billions.
Our criminal justice has reverted back to the middle ages when people were tortured until they confessed and then lynched by an angry mob.
Last edited by earth_as_one; May 3rd, 2011 at 01:35 AM..