Its not about being proven right or wrong. Its about conjecturing about what might be going on. Trying to match reality with fact. Since neither one of us actually knows the classified truth, it can be somewhat enlightening to speculate on the what if's. Thats whats going on here. Btw- If either one of us is privy to the classified truth and we are leaking it, technically we could be capitally punished for treason.
Partially true. Only I don't have any biblical attachment to my end of the speculative spectrum.
I just don't believe what GS is saying and don't believe that the known facts of the deployment and the war planning support his central assertion: that this is a bluff and that Bush will never order an attack on Iraq because Saddam has planted enough WMD in this country to be able to kill us in the millions and lay our cities to waste.
Consider: we have sent upwards to 175,000 combat and support personnel to the Gulf.
We have engaged in a worldwide opinion-molding campaign that has not been seen since the Gulf War.
We have placed enormous national prestige on the line and tied it to an outcome in which Saddam passes into history and Iraq is liberated.
We have decided that Iraq is a major battle in the war against Al Qaeda; we wish to deny AQ the possibility of Saddam acting as their quartermaster. Not to achieve such an end would be a major defeat in the battle against Bin Laden and his pals.
Now then: would we have done all this if Saddam had us by the throat? Would we have set ourselves up for a humiliating climbdown if Saddam had Anthrax Kommandos in our major cities? I think not. We would have concentrated on Al Qaeda or the North Koreans, and we would have made a seperate peace with Saddam.
That's why none of what GS wrote makes any sense.
Be Seeing You,
Chris