To: Alberta's Child; Howlin
Didn't Kay tell Hillary that the reason he is leaving is because the Admin reneged on its committment of resources to finding the WMD? And didn't she smugly (but it's hard to argue) that that speaks volumes about the Administration's thinking on the matter? And this is with 85% of the search done? So we can't say it's searching the size of california anymore. Now it's 15% of california. Or am I wrong?
122 posted on
02/03/2004 10:50:38 AM PST by
Huck
(I was gonna write an opus, but we'll just have to wait and see...)
To: Huck
Check your source again.
126 posted on
02/03/2004 10:55:23 AM PST by
hoosiermama
(prayers for all)
To: Huck
They have in no way searched 85% of the entire country of Iraq in 9 months. What has been targeted in the searches are the known and usual locations, ammo dumps, labs, storeage facilities. Places where waste products were stored etc. Probably some offices etc, at least those that weren't burned before the invasion. 85% of that is done.
So are you a Hillary supporter?
Prairie
127 posted on
02/03/2004 10:56:42 AM PST by
prairiebreeze
(WMD's in Iraq -- The absence of evidence isn't evidence of absence.)
To: Huck
This war was never about WMDs in the first place. I was shocked to see so many intelligent people on this site get taken in by a propaganda campaign that was nothing more than a thinly-veiled means of generating support for the war among the same dopey soccer moms who had been Clinton supporters throughout the 1990s.
137 posted on
02/03/2004 11:09:10 AM PST by
Alberta's Child
(Alberta -- the TRUE North strong and free.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson