That being said, Bush has done a crappy job as to explaining why we went into Iraq.
Tony Blair did a much better job of it 2 days after 9/11 when he stated forcefully that WMD's in the hands of terrorists was unacceptable now that we know they are willing to commit an so heinous as 9/11....any rogue regime we suspect of supplying these weapons is subject ot attack.
This is a no brainer, but the administration has not made it easy on themselves.
That being said, Bush has done a crappy job as to explaining why we went into Iraq.
Either you get it [post-September 11, 2001] or you don't. I understand completely why we went into Iraq.
That is a patently absurd statement.
Sixty-seven percent said the Bush administration made the right decision in going to war with Iraq.
Whenever you get that kind of percentage of people agreeing with you, you have done a good job making the case.
"Our response involves far more than instant retaliation and isolated strikes. Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. (Applause.) From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime." -- President George W. Bush, September 20th. 2001
Do you think Saddam was "with us", or "with the terrorists"?