Replies

Hell of a thing to say during an election.

No, no - we *should* admit to the fact that there are no WMD if there aren't any. It doesn't change the fact that the whole world thought there was, we asked for proof from Saddam Hussein that there wasn't (in fact, got a UN resolution asking for proof), and that Saddam refused to cooperate.

Whose fault is it that *everyone* thought he had them and he couldn't provide evidence that he got rid of them? Certainly not Bush's.

The fact is that Saddam was purposefully evasive and not forthcoming. He got everything he deserved.

Whose fault is it that *everyone* thought he had them and he couldn't provide evidence that he got rid of them? Certainly not Bush's.

Here's the rub. When Blix was over there and coming up with zip, we told him he emphatically he was looking in the wrong places. At the same time we were going before the UN with proof conclusive photos of WMD programs, places to manufacture, warehouse and on and on and on. Remember the comparisons the conservative pundits were making to him being the WMD version of Inspector Closeau? Blix said, ok if I'm looking in the wrong places, then tell me where to look. Suddenly we got quiet about knowing where they were.

That made me change my mind as to the WMD's being a valid reason to go forth.

The fact is that Saddam was purposefully evasive and not forthcoming. He got everything he deserved.

Portions of that could be debated, but by and large you are correct.

Exactly. During a UN hearing, I recall Powell disclosing intercepted phone conversations between senior Iraqi officers than poked fun at how they ran circles around UN inspectors.

The Israelis destroyed an Iraqi breeder reactor in 1981, Hussein later used poison gas against Kurds and Iranians.

Let the leftists whine. The President freed more women and religous minorities from from virtual slavery and actual genocide than all the platitudes from the likes of the pig Kennedy, Jimmy Carter, bent willie, NOW, NARAL . . . .