Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Angry
No, you've missed the point and are jumping to conclusions. You drew an analogy between two scenarios - both of which are uniquely identifiable in that one was carried out on the (incorrect) premise that one party had WMD and the other wasn't.
|
I'm still lost.
It sounds like you're saying removing Saddam was bad because we thought he had WMD's and he didn't, but the removal of Fatah by force isn't worth condemning because they didn't have WMDs?
