================================================ Subject: Re: Odp: RE: Survey 1 of 2 From: "Jon" To: Date: Fri 3 Aug 2001 20:11:00 -0700 ================================================ I can understand and sympathize, but with Iraq's legs cut off the way they were, sure, Saddam was still a pain (as much as Khadaffi is in Libya) but Iraq still stands as a buffer between Iran and the other Gulf states. I think you'll find that factor as one of the major factors that no serious effort was made to remove Saddam from power. Better the Devil you know.... I suppose there are some that would say "But we bombed his palaces!" -- if the U.S. wanted Saddam dead, he would be. ----- Original Message ----- From: "Keith P. Mears" To: Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 8:01 PM Subject: Re: Odp: RE: Survey 1 of 2 > As an active serviceman at the time of that conflict, I can tell you that > about 98% of the people I knew felt it should have been the mission, and > Bush Sr., as C-IN-C, had the ultimate say-so, and therefore, bears the brunt > of the military's dissatisfaction with NOT going in to Bahgdad. > > That said, your assessment is correct. > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Jon" > To: > Sent: Friday, August 03, 2001 9:54 PM > Subject: Re: Odp: RE: Survey 1 of 2 > > > > I will disagree with that, Keith. George Sr. did have the wherewithall to > > go to Baghdad, but it wasn't the mission -- take a gander at Powell's > book; > > I believe he covers why that was the case. > > > > To unsubscribe or change your preferences for the Creed-Discuss list, visit: > http://www.winduplist.com/ls/discuss/form.asp > To unsubscribe or change your preferences for the Creed-Discuss list, visit: http://www.winduplist.com/ls/discuss/form.asp