Liberals are the same everywhere because similar questions I have when debating one get the "never seem to get answered" treatment. My standard question is, how long were we supposed to wait? (The answer every time): I don't know. The next question, one more month, 3 months, 6 months? Which goes to your conclusion that we would be unable to keep the troops ready indefinitely and the only reason that Saddam pretended to cooperate was because of the threat.
The answer is always, they don't know BUT we should have let the inspections go longer.
12 years of Saddam jerking us around just wasn't enough apparently. What a waste of space this bunch is.
They know they're wrong but like small children just can't admit it and resort to stomping their feet and pointing at someone else as the guilty party. If they admit that we were right to take out Saddam and his thugs then questions might arise as to why clinton allowed it to fester and spent time, energy and money on that pressing problem of Kosovo.
He brings no particular talent to Kerry's campaign. Apart from his status as a brave war veteran, he sends no positive message to the public. As a Vietnam vet who tried and failed to fend off attacks on his national security credentials, he undermines the claim that Kerry's own war record insulates him from similar attacks. What Cleland brings to Kerry's campaign is the emotional power of victimization—a throwback to the worst of old-time Democratic Party politics, to its emphasis on victimhood over ability and virtue. But whereas in the past it was specific interest groups—minorities, women, gays—who were the noble victims, today it is the Democratic Party itself. Cleland is a reminder to fellow Democrats that they have spend the past three years being persecuted and that it's time to start avenging their humiliations.As they say, read the whole thing. It actually admits the Republicans NEVER QUESTIONED CLELAND'S PATRIOTISM!