[A Vast RightWing Conspirator]

The Oil Ministry was secured early in the battle of Baghdad, even if the hospitals and museums were not; that told us about one Bush administration priority.

Nice to have confirmation that you and William Pfaff were faxed the same talking points.

Humor aside, is it true? Or, in Clinton's best tradition, it does not matter whether it is true or not.

Let's state this again:

- the U.S. military protected the Oil Ministry building.

- the U.S. military did not protect the Iraqi museums.

Unless you have any evidence that the above 2 statements are false, then your remarks above may be funny (that's debatable too) but they are also irrelevant.

By the way, another exercise in logic:

Premise 1 - W said that he was justified to invade Iraq because it had WMD's.

Premise 2 - Iraq has no WMD's.

Conclusion - W was not justified to invade Iraq.

Unless 'Premise 2' turns out to be invalid, then W is guilty of naked aggression and is fully responsible for the death of 100+ American soldiers. Among other things.

[Timmy]

The Bush administration recognized that that Iraqi oil is crucial to prevent the country from disintegrating into Afghanistan-style poverty and chaos. They didn't recognize that the liberals would seize upon an already looted museum (before the fall of Baghdad) as the most important consideration the coalition should have while it's fighting the bad guys. Personally, I say screw the museum. Those things have been looted hundreds of times over the past few thousand years. They'll turn up.

[Maceman]

Unless 'Premise 2' turns out to be invalid, then W is guilty of naked aggression and is fully responsible for the death of 100+ American soldiers. Among other things.

The discovery of terrorist connections -- including the training camp south of Baghdad, gives Bush all the justification he ever needed for this war, even without WMD.

[Miss Marple]

First exercise in logic:

Because we have not found WMD's, nor announced it if we have found them, is not proof that they do not exist.

As has been reported numerous times, many people in the museum community think a great many of the artifacts had already been removed, either for safe-keeping or due to Saddam's people already selling them. Substantial proof is now in print for both of these efforts.

The question I have is why you, who have never, to my knowledge, posted anything to do with archaeology, suddenly posted a thread about this with the exact same point as William Pfaff, noted Clintonista and receiver of DNC talking points. THAT was my point.

The US military did its job. The answer to the museum mystery will eventually be solved. YOU, however, will still be refusing to address the point of my post.

[verity]

Are you really Tim Robbins?

[Redleg Duke]

Maybe these dickheads from the Globe figure that there will be more money for Iraq to rebuild itself from admissions to the museum in Baghdad than from oil exports.

Talk about elitist swine!