i think this is exactly the point. the hypocrisy. any old excuse will do for a first strike on a third world country, sitting on lots of oil, with a decimated military and a civilian population that's been living under an embargo since the last gulf fiasco.
there is always more than one reason for what the "power elite" do, as this email points out very nicely. also, don't forget the failed attempt to get saddam in 1997 (i believe it was). he "castro-ed" them.
this entire issue has degenerated into a pissing contest between shrub and saddam. with all kinds of collateral benefits for keeping the US public's mind off other things.
R
>This undermines the credibility of the claim that Washington is motivated
>by security concerns rather than some other ulterior motives. And that
>can be a convincing argument, especially when we add a list of those
>possible ulterior motives. My favorites include:
>
>a) wag the dog to divert attention from the economic fiasco, Enron & Co
>scandal, and no achievement of any domestic issue which may work against
>the Repugs in November
>
>b) payback to the Brits for sending their mercenaries to Afghanistan - for
>some unknown to me reason the Brits seem to be the prime mover of military
>actions in the Persian Gulf; any ideas why?
>
>c) personal vendetta for the botched attempt to assassinate Shrub Sr. -
>perhaps not the primary motive but adding to the zeal, after all regicide
>- even if botched - cannot go unpunished
>
>any other suggestions?
>
>wojtek