Replies

The Resolution passed 296-133 by the House of Representatives and 77-23 by the Senate on October 10 and 11, 2002. There were 24 reasons given on why force was authorized. Many had nothing to do with WMD.

Thanks for the reminder. You ought to be working for the Bush administration, since they don't bother fighting back with the truth anymore. For a man with the biggest bully pulpit on earth, our President may as well have laryngitis 24/7.

I don't know why many Reps just don't trot out the language in the Resolution whenever the Dems and MSM start the no WMD rant.

I would reverse the question. How could we possibly allow Saddam to remain in power after 9/11? People seem to forget that we were spending billions maintaining the no-fly zones and that Iraq was on the State Department's list of state sponsors of terrorism. The Oil for Food program would still be functioning providing Saddam with billions (along with the UN receiving its administrative fees) and show what a sham the containment of Saddam really was.

I agree with you that the Adminstration and the Reps in Congress don't do a good job in articulating and defending our policies. However, even an eloquent Tony Blair has had difficulty in silencing the critics.