[Burkeman1]

I do deny them. Bush and Powell have both denied them publically. Change the subject?

And I meant "not" instead of "now" in my last post.

My bad.

[Peach]

What I have heard Powell and Bush deny publicly is that they have proof that Iraq was behind 9/11. Powell has stated also that they just "don't know".

No one here is saying Iraq is behind 9/11. This is a war on terror. Those who harbor terrorists, fund them, etc. Maybe you didn't hear?

Iraq's support for terrorists in general and al Qaeda specifically was why we went there. One of many reasons.

[AFPhys]

You are delusional if you think that the President and SoS now maintain there was not sufficient evidence of WMD to go justify, in itself, bashing Hussein. Kay's report (and the continuing follow-on evidence) easily provided all the proof any rational being (leaves out Demodogs, EUrotwits and some Libertarians) could ever ask for of Hussein's continued pursuit of Chem, Bio and nuclear programs.

The only thing the President and the remainder of the administration are left scratching their heads about is the reason for not (yet) discovering stockpiles of expected chemical weapons themselves, though we have found empty warheads to deliver such weaponry.

[As an aside, personally, I suspect that the huge stashes of often camouflaged "pesticides" discovered may in fact constitute those weapons - possibly intentionally created that way for "deniability", possibly due to deterioration for lack of refrigeration or intentional chemical treatment, possibly due to Iraqis not following Hussein's orders, possibly due to intentional or unintentional false reporting the results of the ID tests. Many of those so-called "pesticides" are nearly as potent (within a factor of five or so) as most "chemical weapons", and would constitute a UN-approved device to have chem weapon capability]

No: There has been no denial that the WMD threat was sufficient cause.

Certainly, there has been an attempt by the administration to refocus attention on the other five reasons to smash Hussein which the President stated in the 2003 State of the Union speech (as well as his 2002 address to the UN), as I trumpeted prior to the BASH constituted MY important reasons, but there has been no denial that SH's WMD program in itself was sufficient casus belli.

[Personally, all I need to know is that thousands of Iraqis per month are no longer dying at the hands of that regime.]