And your problem Js (and others), you are either so bent up in opposing war or Bush or both, that you continually ignore the evidence and situation AT THE TIME Bush made his decision to go to war.
No. I could care less about Bush and I support our staying in Iraq (now that we've broken all the dishes).
So, all this effort in trying to cast doubt & nefarious reasons for going to war is all........an effort to.......well, you said you don't care about Bush, so clue us in. Perhaps to make sure Bush's legacy is properly tarnished?
AT THE TIME (which for some reason must be capitalised) were we given all of the evidence?
Bush
was, as might I add pretty much all the Senators Of the Intel Committee, along with those congress critters privvy to all the intel that comes thru. What "we" were given was largely unidirectional along the lines of the decision already made, from ALL the evidence Bush and Co were provided. EVERY President will shape what they present in the direction for which their decisions are headed. Might I add EVERY President does that, or at least every modern day President. Again, THEY make the decisions, not "us". And our representatives which "we" elected overwhelmingly agreed..........until the polls said they shouldn't
The thousands of tons of biological and chemical weapons (and don't forget the tens of thousands of nuclear centrifuges!) mysteriously transported to Syria through the barren western Iraqi desert which is of course never monitored by intelligence resources.
And who's making that claim, that everything was transported in large masses thru the dessert? And why you keep bringing up nuclear centrifuges is beyond me. I've never claimed or implied those were the WMD being moved out of the region. I doubt very seriously Saddam would have wanted those moved in any way shape or form. A little intellectual dishonesty perhaps?
That's plausible.
In small enough quantities, absolutely.
And with the direct & indirct connections Saddam had with terrorists like AlQeada, and with the events of 911, it would have been irresponsible for Bush NOT to have gone into Iraq to take out that threat.
Bullshit. There were very few connections, if any.
I didn't realize you worked for the Intelligence agency Js. Do tell. Perhaps you can get a conference call set up with the likes of Wolfowitz, privvy to such intimate intel, explaining the 10+yrs Saddam's ties with terrorists extended
Moreover, there wasn't a single shred of clear evidence that Saddam had any intention to hand over WMD to any organisation. Those groups didn't exactly like him, or are you forgetting that part for convenience?
No, but when you have an enemy as hated as that great Satan America, it's very easy for folks who don't exactly like each other to actually work toegther, even if it's not direct help.
You don't make pre-emptive war on a hunch.
Correct. You make it on the evidence presented at the time, and then using your best judgement, make such decisions
This was a war in search of justification.
Well, considering the plethora of evidence/intel to the contrary, your opinion is duely noted
Why you religiously devote yourself to justify a war whose evidence is based on a flimsy house of cards amazes me.
Perhaps because I don't see a mountain of intelligence conclusions, from sources across the globe as "flimsy". Perhaps because I don't see the President as a moron, or an idiot, or an incompotent bafoon, or a dumbed down version of Hitler. I see him as a sincere leader, making decisions based on the evidence presented him, to best serve and protect this country. As such your OPINION of how unjust this war is remains largely that. History can judge how just or unjust this war actually is determined to be, and given both the evidence at the time, the connections that WERE present to terrorists, and the events of 911, provide precisely what's necessary in my mind to deem this war just. Which also means every life given in that pursuit was tragic yet not a death in vain, but in the pursuit of both American security and Iraqi freedom
My guess is that it is purely partisan. You'd never have supported this war if a Democrat had made the same pathetic arguments that this administration had.
And you couldn't be more wrong
