Replies

Who gives a shit if he has/had them or not? Does it matter?

We wanted a strategic foothold in the middle east. DONE. We wanted a madman out of power. DONE. We wanted to bring democracy to a backwater place. DONE.

'nuff said.

I agree with what you said - But I will also say...GWB (and his team) need to start having a much clearer / coherent message about Iraq and why we needed to act -

They need to start talking with force behind their words - not empty statements like "I want to know the truth" - He already knows the truth!!

Saddam was a mad-man that ignored 17 UN resolutions - A man intent on supporting terrorism - a man intent on developing (or finding new ways) to develop WMD or WMD programs - Period!! -

The world is safer without him - period - the Middle-East will change for the better now that Saddam is gone...and freedom has a chance to take hold in Iraq - that self-worth will come to the people of Iraq....and with this self-worth they will reject the idea of terrorism....and this attitude will spread throughout the Middle East in time -

This is what GWB needs to start saying...and saying loud and clear!!

It does matter because - as numerous posts to FR show - it's been well established that he had/has them. The argument made in the run-up to the war had more to do with WMDs than with gaining a strategic foothold in the Middle East. And I believe a good number of Americans supported the war because they believed Iraq had WMDs which they would use or give to al-Qaeda type terrorists to use. I think the President/Administration needs to challenge this report (as people have here) rather than just accept it's conclusions.