<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Last Night.</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.theagitator.com/2002/10/30/last-night/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2002/10/30/last-night/</link>
	<description>It rankles me when somebody tries to tell somebody what to do.</description>
	<pubDate>Wed, 07 Jan 2009 01:37:01 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3</generator>
		<item>
		<title>By: John</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2002/10/30/last-night/#comment-10362</link>
		<dc:creator>John</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Oct 2002 08:03:41 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dev.theagitator.com/?p=1210#comment-10362</guid>
		<description>I have to say something about your belief that Saddam is more likely to use his WMD's if we invade, and not use them if we don't.

To me the point has been more along the lines that it isn't Saddam who is the biggest danger of using them, he's the danger of supplying them to those who will use them as soon as they acquire them.

This is the WMD arguement that made me decide it was neccessary for him to go, inspections are not going to eliminate the existance of the weapons, sanctions wont, only destruction of them will remove them, and only the US military has the ability to do so in the current environment.

The longer the delay, the probability approaches 100% that he will supply others with them, who will then use them against western targets, giving him deniability. The longer the wait, the worse it will be.
</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I have to say something about your belief that Saddam is more likely to use his WMD&#8217;s if we invade, and not use them if we don&#8217;t.</p>
<p>To me the point has been more along the lines that it isn&#8217;t Saddam who is the biggest danger of using them, he&#8217;s the danger of supplying them to those who will use them as soon as they acquire them.</p>
<p>This is the WMD arguement that made me decide it was neccessary for him to go, inspections are not going to eliminate the existance of the weapons, sanctions wont, only destruction of them will remove them, and only the US military has the ability to do so in the current environment.</p>
<p>The longer the delay, the probability approaches 100% that he will supply others with them, who will then use them against western targets, giving him deniability. The longer the wait, the worse it will be.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Geoff</title>
		<link>http://www.theagitator.com/2002/10/30/last-night/#comment-10361</link>
		<dc:creator>Geoff</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 30 Oct 2002 17:20:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://dev.theagitator.com/?p=1210#comment-10361</guid>
		<description>I'm not surprised at what Luntz attempted.  That fits with what I know of him as former _enfant terrible_ of the political opinion polling set.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;m not surprised at what Luntz attempted.  That fits with what I know of him as former _enfant terrible_ of the political opinion polling set.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
