No i'm not. I just favor concentrating our military efforts on targets that constitute a genuine threat to our nation. I would have supported a massive operation against Afghanistan - even in Pakistan - to crush the Taliban and get Osama "Dead or alive". He was the 9-11 culprit - and we still haven't caught him. Why don't you accuse our policymakers of being "doves" because they've let Osama continue to roam free? It's as if, instead of hunting down the Atlanta killer of yesterday, police deployed all their forces against some bookies on the city's southside. Because I think Iraq was an unncessary diversion doesn't make me a dove.
-------------------------------------
If you think that Iraq was a diversion (necessary or not) then you don't understand or haven't studied the administration's strategy. Our invasion of Iraq had nothing to do with 9.11, or WMD, or GW1, or GHWB.
Churchillbuff is the terrorist's best friend. He has no problem with the following (which is just the tip of the iceberg):
The Senate Intelligence Report contained over 60 detailed pages of Hussein's direct connections to Al Qaeda including:
78 reports from different sources provided information that Hussein's regime was actively training Iraqi intelligence soldiers for terrorist attacks against America.
Iraq provided Al Qaeda with bomb making, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear training.
Direct meetings took place between senior Iraqi military officers and top Al Qaeda operatives for over 10 years.
But Neville Chamberlain has NO problem with any of that. Nope. None.