[liberallarry]

Ties to Palestinian terrorists are not equivalent to ties to Al Queda.
Manufacturing, or attempting to manufacture, chemical and biological weapons, is not equivalent to trying to obtain atomic weapons.

The truth is still out on most of this. Neocons have long believed Saddam posed a real and imminent danger to our country. They approached Clinton in 1998 about possible regime change. But it's also true that Saddam of 2001 was much, much weaker than Saddam of 1991.

[StriperSniper]

But it's also true that Saddam of 2001 was much, much weaker than Saddam of 1991.

And thus far more likely to use terrorist proxies, who would not leave a Baghdad return address.

[arkfreepdom]

Tell that to Bob Graham. He stated in October, 2002 that Iraq was attempting to develop a nuke program. Since he sits on the intel. committee, he obviously saw the same info. Also in 1998 the dims in the senate voted to give Clinton all the authority he needed to take out Saddam. They of course knew he lacked the will or courage....W didn't.

Tell your revisionist history to other dims. They are so full of hate for the POTUS that they will believe anything.

[Stallone]

A liar is a liar.

Of course, you would know, chump.

Bush is an American of great character, resolve, a truly historic figure in the making of this great country.

The 'Rats continue to bury themselves in treason, corruption and incompetence.

We're on to you, and so is America. Your time has passed. Get lost.

[DPB101]

Neocons have long believed Saddam posed a real and imminent danger to our country. They approached Clinton in 1998 about possible regime change.

Those warmongering "neocons" again huh? The Senate voted 99 to 0 and the House voted 406 to 7 in 1998 to use force against Iraq. Apparently not only are Republicans "neocons" but so are Democrats. At least in 1998.

Republicans wanted to take out Saddam in the first Gulf War, Republicans overwhelmingly support Bush's action in Iraq now. So why the use of the word "neocon?" Are you implying there is a cabal of "neocons" who are "neoconning" the entire Republican party to support their position?

[lawdude]

"But it's also true that Saddam of 2001 was much, much weaker than Saddam of 1991."

And of course, you know this as a fact? Sources please!

Else, your credibility matches that of the dems.