The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Iraq

> how about this (conterversial) suggestion ; asassinate Saddam Hussein.
> If it is acceptable to kill civilians because their country is a threat, I
> can't see a problem with removing the man who carries the blame.

why not assassinate clinton instead, in a way he's to blame for the
sanctions? (easy answer: gore would take over and he wont make things
better). but to continue on a more serious note: isn't that what the
bombing is trying to achieve? ok, i know the point is supposed to be to
get iraq to comply with un resolutions etc, but at the end of the day
saddam is the problem, right? as we're in the 90s and the US care about
their image it wouldn't look too good to send the cia in, so why not bomb
the place, boost the arms industry and give everyone the impression that
we're fighting for peace and democracy at the same time!
to be honest it is hard to make sense of the whole situation.  If the US
had wanted to get rid of saddam they would have done so a long time ago.
he's useful as a "demon", so why the whole strike thing now? can anyone
offer any insights?


[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]