[leftiesareloonie]

Are you really saying it wouldn't bother you at all if the worst that Bush's critics have to say about the lead-up to war was true?

Supposed he lied, exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam and suppose that Saddam had nothing to do with Al Quaeda or 9/11. Are you saying you wouldn't care, since Saddam was a bad guy anyway and deserved to be offed. No matter the mendaciousness of the public justification given by the president for the war.


I just want to know where you stand.

[Steve_Seattle]

The last issue of National Review had a good article detailing the links between Saddam and terrorism, links discovered both before and after the war. Regarding the WMD issue, I should remind you that - going back to the Clinton administration - there was a bipartisan consensus that Saddam had WMD's or the ability to make them, was not being forthright with inspectors, and posed a threat to the USA. The debate was over what to do about this state of affairs, not whether Saddam had WMD's.

[Steve_Seattle]

"Supposed he lied, exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam and suppose that Saddam had nothing to do with Al Quaeda or 9/11. Are you saying you wouldn't care, since Saddam was a bad guy anyway and deserved to be offed. No matter the mendaciousness of the public justification given by the president for the war."

My comment was a reply to this comment of yours (above). My comments seems pertinent both to your post and to the thread as a whole.

[cyncooper]

Are you really saying it wouldn't bother you at all if the worst that Bush's critics have to say about the lead-up to war was true?

Yes, it would bother me if the charges made were true. But they aren't.

Supposed he lied, exaggerated the threat posed by Saddam and suppose that Saddam had nothing to do with Al Quaeda or 9/11. Are you saying you wouldn't care, since Saddam was a bad guy anyway and deserved to be offed.

It has already been documented that Saddam had something to do with Al Qaeda, so it's too late and in fact false (you don't like false stuff, remember?) to say he had "nothing" to with them. But I guess we may soon know even more.

No matter the mendaciousness of the public justification given by the president for the war.

Again, it is false (oh dear, there you go again!) to state that the president used this report alone as justification for war.