You flat out accuse the "leadership" of the War in Iraq of "duplicity". That's not questioning anything, that's making a statement, as I so pithily pointed out.
I have no problem with you questioning whatever you like. Indeed, I consider it my duty as a citizen to question everything related to my government at least once.
But don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.
First of all, as I've said on numerous occasions, I'm willing to give Bush the benefit of the doubt. I think that he was probably manipulated by those around him who fed him slanted information.
But the major reasons that were given for the war simply don't add up. Even if some WMD are found (a dubious assertion at this point), Iraq was supposed to be awash in tons of chemicals and biotoxins. Nothing has been found anywhere. If Bush really was misled, shouldn't some heads be rolling? Its bad enough that our intel people were totally blindsided by 9/11 (an horrific failure on the part of our intelligence community for which no one has been really held responsible, to my knowledge), now they appear to have blown one of the most critical missions since 9/11.
And what about the Osama connection? Other than a flimsy story about Iraqi intelligence in Prague, there really hasn't been much in the way of proof that Saddam's govt was involved with the muslim terrorists.
Meanwhile, our soldiers are stuck as occupiers in an increasingly hostile Iraq....getting picked off at a rate of a couple a week.
I'm sorry if my questioning offends you, but there are plenty things to criticize here.
There are several nations in the middle east that have many more of osama's terrorists than Iraq (Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, for starters). And several also have WMD programs (Pakistan and Syria). So...why Iraq? The fact that the stated reasons for the invasion don't add up fans the suspicion that some people in power had ulterior motives.