“White House aides meanwhile shied away from the question of whether Iraq was better off, 10 years after the United States launched an invasion on the grounds of eradicating weapons of mass destruction which were never found. ‘I think historians have to make the judgment,’ White House spokesman Jay Carney said. ‘I think that ridding the world of Saddam Hussein was a welcome development for the world and for Iraq, but again, the president opposed the policy, as candidate, of invading Iraq and as a candidate for president as well.’ US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel acknowledged the huge human toll the conflict had taken on the Iraqi people.”
Related posts:
Harvey Silverglate: How Robert Mueller Tried To Entrap Me
No Banker Left Behind
Gov. Jan Brewer mistakenly endorses Obama
Arizona deputies bust pot 'compassion clubs'
Czech pharmacies begin selling medical marijuana
Quantum Spying: GCHQ Used Fake LinkedIn Pages to Target Engineers
Foreign investors: Why US bank may close your account
Police get the tools they want; Britain loses the liberties it holds dear
Bitcoin Poses a Challenge for Law Enforcement
U.K. pays Iraqi torture victims millions in compensation
Organic growers lose decision in suit versus Monsanto over seeds
Hello Kitty Doll Lands Tulsa State Fair Worker In Jail
French officials furious at Economist "time-bomb" taunt
Abuse at Ecuadorian ‘gay conversion’ drug rehabs shocks authorities
Former heart surgeon sues Jackson County, sheriff over false arrest, land seizure