Re: Context

1

Goddard is correct. If a threat is removed -- imminent or not -- America is safer. Dean's statement, "The capture of Saddam has not made America safer," is not true by his own words.


Posted by: able baker | Link to this comment | 12-17-03 7:11 PM
horizontal rule
2

Not really. When Dean said in 2002 that Saddam was a threat, although not an imminent one, Saddam was the ruler of Iraq. When Saddam was caught last weekend, he was living in a small hole. It doesn't seem implausable that the actual capture of Saddam in any way made America safer. Moreover, just because Saddam was a threat does not mean that removing him fixes the threat. It is possible, and Dean seems to hold this position, that invading Iraq has provoked a bigger worldwide threat to the United State's safety.


Posted by: Michael | Link to this comment | 12-17-03 8:46 PM
horizontal rule
3

Corr: It doesn't seem implausable that the actual capture of Saddam did notin any way made America safer.


Posted by: Michael | Link to this comment | 12-17-03 8:47 PM
horizontal rule
4

It all boils down to this: how many Americans in any given year have died as a result of Saddam Hussein that weren't already in Iraq on a war footing? Zero. If we had not invaded Iraq, your life wouldn't have changed one iota.

I think Dean is a disaster waiting to happen for the Democratic Party, but this criticism is 100% bogus.


Posted by: | Link to this comment | 12-17-03 8:51 PM
horizontal rule
5

That was me, by the way.


Posted by: apostropher | Link to this comment | 12-17-03 8:52 PM
horizontal rule