Does it bother you to know that Iraq has weapons of mass destruction?

[KillerMuffin]

You, specifically, not your government, your dog, your mother, or board pundits.

I'm going to side-step the issue about whether Iraq does possess these things or not. It's not relevant to the question. Instead, I'm going to pose a hypothetical situation and ask you how you'd feel about it. Yes, there are only two choices. You would either be concerned or you wouldn't. No qualifiers, no modifiers, just yes or no.

If you knew that Saddam was in possession of these weapons of mass destruction, would you feel concerned?

Discuss.

Please, no throwing epithets and no exchanging of personal undergarments.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

Of course. Put aside that he has shown a willingness to use those weapons, and has stated a goal for despotic influence over the region, and part of that goal includes the destruction of Israel, just having the weapons creates a situation where prudence demands his neighbors acquire some, too. Do we really want an arms race in the Middle East?

 

[Blindinthedark]

No more than the Americans having weapons of mass destruction.

 

[Guest]

 

[CelestialBody]

 

[Sheaf_Beast]

Yes... Saddam should not be trusted.

 

[fond of facials]

It bothers me that humanity in general has weapons of mass destruction. It bothers me that the human race spends so much time, effort and money on killing each other. So I guess that would be a yes.

 

[Myrrdin]

As concerned over the fact that Libya
Syria
Iran
Ukraine
India
Pakistan
Indonesia
etc etc
has them

 

[kiwiwolf]

It concerns me that anyone has them.

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

The "We have them, why can't they have them?" agrument, which puts the U.S. government (and hell, even the Chinese government) on the same ballfield as Iraq's is to play the "What about the bad things America does?" Devil's Advocate card one too many times.

 

[sigh]

It concerns me that anyone has them.

what he said...

but it worries me a little more when they're in the hands of someone who's already proven an eagerness to use them...

so I voted yes.

 

[Linedrive]

I agree with most of the earlier sentiments that it is bothersome that anyone has these weapons. That being said, someone who has a proven track record of using them and a willingness to defy the international community is more worrysome than some of the others. I think the U.S. government has it pegged when they say the primary concern is the passing along of technology and materials to terrorist organizations.

At least if Hussein unleashed something, there is an address we can come looking for him. With the terrorist....well.

 

[NorthwestRain]

I'm also just as concerned about the weapons in Bush's hands, when the world knows he's not exactly trustworthy, he's scared out of his mind (as understandably most Americans are), and he's being controlled by unseen others with questionable agendas.

He DEFINATLY has nuclear, chemical and biological weapons at his disposal, and due to threats he has made, he DEFINATLY does have the propensity to use them.

A bit like the pot calling the kettle black, don't you think.

Also remember, it was Bush and his Axis speech that caused the current trouble with Korea.

I still vote yes to the poll though.

 

[QuickDuck]

It worries me as much as it does knowing America has them, England has them, France has them, Russia has them and countless other countries. (some ruled by possibly bigger fruitloops than him. I don;t know)

I am under no doubt that he has something somewhere, but am I in particular worried? no.

Why?

I cannot explain really, I just believe I cannot go through each and every day, worrying about it.

Should Iraq have them?

Well in my liberal left wing way, I don't believe anyone should have them but know in the never ending quest for "bigger and better", that something else will appear that will be multiple times worse.

 

[Guest]

 

[LadyG]

I don't think anyone should have them.

But why is it okay for America/Russia/North Korea et al to have them?

Right now, I'd be more concerned with North Korea.

I'm still trying to figure out why/how the hunt for Bin Laden, for 9/11 has changed to "Get Saddam" at all costs.

 

[Guest]

 

[MissTaken]

Iraq having weapons of mass destruction doesn't bother me as much as Sadaam having the power to use or not use those weapons.

 

[kiwiwolf]

^^^^^^Please don't post unless you have an IQ over 3

Thanks.

Then why are you posting?

 

[Blindinthedark]

Then why are you posting?

You're giving him too much credit.

 

[concrete]

No more than the Americans having weapons of mass destruction.

BUMP

 

[Dixon Carter Lee]

The "We have them, why can't they have them?" agrument, which puts the U.S. government (and hell, even the Chinese government) on the same ballfield as Iraq's is to play the "What about the bad things America does?" Devil's Advocate card one too many times.

BUMP

 

[LadyG]

It's not being Devil's Advocate.

Why all of a sudden is Saddam such a big threat, when no one has bothered with him for the last 10 years?

North Korea has stated that they have a nuclear weapon that can reach the west coast of the U.S., and this is not a problem?

 

[kiwiwolf]

You're giving him too much credit.

It's "Be Kind to Paranoid Delusionals Day"

 

[Guest]