| You know we attacked almost 350 separate targets in Iraq with aircraft between June of 2002 and the start of the war right? Over 250,000 pounds of bombs were dropped. All of this in response to Iraq shooting at our aircraft in no-fly zones imposed from the early 90s.
In my opinion, if you invade another country (see: Kuwait) and get decimated where the decimators impose no-fly zones, and then you attack aircraft enforcing those zones, you are grounds for declared war. WMD are irrelevant at that point.
So while Bush is seeking approval for declared war, he bombs them. Clinton bombs them in retaliation in the same way but it's never questioned because of the end result? Because there was no invasion?
In 1998 Clinton authorized Desert Fox, a 70 hour bombing campaign with over 100 targets in response to Iraq not allowing weapon inspectors in. There were others as well but it's pointless to mention them since the point has been made.
Do liberals think bombing campaigns and attacks on foreign soil are just fine so long as ground forces are not sent in to occupy? I can't seem to figure them out. Someone please explain it for us in laymans terms. | 