Replies

"There was no "intelligence hoax."

Just thinking out loud:

Hmm, I seem to remember Sec Powell making a big deal of showing intelligence maps showing movement of trucks and he made a big deal of holding up a vial to represent anthrax. Now if they had this great intelligence pinpointing movement of trucks, how come they haven't found wmds? Is it possible that we were lied to?

I think so. Is it possible that one of the reasons for invading Iraq was a personal payback by Bush to punish saddam for attempting to assassinate his father 10/11 years ago. They continue to call it a "war", but, as far as I'm concerned it is a "police action". If he were really serious about destroying terrorism, he should have invaded Iran, Saudi Arabia, North Korea as each of these countries fit Bush's criteria of an enemy, which is to say, any country that aids, abets and harbours terrorists. It was only after the "police action" commenced that they suddenly connected Iraq to terrorists. Very convenient to justify invading another country.

This is one registed independant voter who will not vote for him in '04 because of his obscene spending spree he's on and other reasons listed below.

The republicrats are "democrat lite" and I will not vote for either party. As for his tax "reduction", let's just see if they don't get us through the back door relative to increases in the fed gas tax and other "fees".

In any event, both parties continue to violate their sworn oaths to uphold the Constitution, to wit; passage of CFR, "patriot act" and the fatherland, oops, excuse me, the "homeland security act". These are the major reasons I will not vote for "Dem Lite".

BTW, after the second "warning" of impending attacks, I ignored every subsequent one. The best way to get more freedom restricting laws on the books is to frighten half your population into being insecure.

FReegards

A well-written piece with which I tend to agree. However, I suspect neither Bush or Blair have really gambled their futures away here.

In the fullness of time, I believe we will see yet another coup by these two on this very topic.

I am a devoted student of strategery, and I am learning its ways by observing the ways of the Master of Strategery himself.

The accusations and derision of the Master by his opponents are not compatible with the reality of his many successes. Those who tend to misunderestimate the Master would be well advised to reexamine history and seek to understand his many teachings on the topic of strategery.

Enlightenment will follow.

"The secret, my friends, is strategery."

Never mind the mass graves now being unearthed of an estimated 300,000 victims, which together with the million deaths in his wars make Saddam the biggest mass murderer of Muslims in all history.

Intersting how billy jeff sent our troops into Bosnia and Kosovo because of the "ethnic cleansing" that needed to be stopped. Yet the limited reporting from those countries, there have been few "mass" graves found and no were near the number of casualties.

I can't help but wonder how the conspiracy-theory folks explain Saddam's motives for being deposed. If he didn't have the WMD, all he had to do was grant free access and be helpful to the inspectors and we would have had to rethink our reasons for going in. If he had done this, it is likely he would still be in power today. I would really like to see a rational line of thought on how he could have been so stupid...

Re: . . intelligence misjudgment of Gulf War II?

It was . . that the 50,000 elite soldiers of Saddam's well-trained, well-equipped Special Republican Guard would put up a fierce battle for Baghdad.

Bzzzzt ! Wrong ! It was Saddom shills, and anti-war zealots, who predicted a "river of blood" and a "quagmire" that would bog down the US military.

These were the same people who wrongfully predicted "tens of thousands of US bodybags" in Kabul. Bush and Blair had confidence in their military the whole way through, and, to their credit, never waivered or went wobbly dispite overwhelming presure.

To quote Rummy: "Never have so many been so wrong about so much."