wrote in message
...
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 19:37:26 -0800, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

The embargo was becoming ineffective since there was so much fraud in
the oil for food program and the number of countries that were simply
ignoring it.
Eventually there was going to be a showdown if we wanted to perpetuate
this sham. It is certainly a fact that most of western Europe were
criticizing the US and UK for their actions and Saddam was actually
gaining support, not losing it. People were questioning our need to
bomb these people virtually every day. We were finding the status quo
hard to justify.
Bush had 2 choices, declare victory or declare war, he went the wrong
way.


He didn't go the wrong way. He lied and went to war when no war was
justified. The embargo was still working, and there was no reason to do
more
than what we were doing.


Wasn't that the wrong way to go?

You really need to read up on how "well" the embargo was working.
Start with "oil for food fraud" and then go look at the number of
countries that simply ignored it.
We had accomplished about we were going to by 2000 and we should have
come home.


The embargo was having problems, but it wasn't ineffective. We could have
maintained it for quite a while longer, especially if we actually had a
statesman in the White House. Bush screwed the pooch on so many levels and
with so many things. We won't recover for years from his mishandling.

--
Nom=de=Plume