Quote:
Originally posted by calculoso+Oct 8 2004, 11:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (calculoso @ Oct 8 2004, 11:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Agamemnon@Oct 8 2004, 04:49 PM
That's interesting, I'd never heard that violations of the Oil for Food program were a 'major' reason for the war. Did the administration proclaim this or is it an 'informal' reason?
|
I'm looking at it from a different point of view.
If the Oil for Food program didn't exist, I doubt that France and Russia (etc) would have stood in the way of the various resolutions. If they agree to tougher wording, tougher consequences, etc, then the US and Britain don't go it alone. (ie: there is no war)
Chances are that if Saddam didn't have those countries interested, he doesn't play as many games. [/b][/quote]
Very true. Are we agreeing, or did I misunderstand you?