Its obvious you have an agenda that goes way beyond merely being skeptical of decisions made by the Bush administration. Also, most conservatives on FR aren't engaging in any "knee jerk partisanship". As for you being principled, I don't buy it. Especially not after reading the following remark you made earlier on this thread.
>>>BTW, I opposed the war but thought that he did have WMDs. Perhaps I was too gullible in believing Rumsfeld. Live and learn.
134 posted on 05/30/2003 5:23 PM MDT by Captain Kirk
This points to a lack of consistency and integrity in your argument.
>>>BTW, the main reason for the war as stated long ago by Wolfowitz (to create a counterweight to Saudi Arabia) ....
Now you're even contradicting yourself. LOL That was never the main reason.
I remind you, Paul Wolfowitz isn't the POTUS, the VPOTUS, or Defense Secretary. These attempts to undermine the truth, shows that you're as desperate as the liberal establishment is. So you fabricate falsehoods and create distortions about the historical record. A record by the way, which hasn't been completed. The main reason for the war was, the WMD. Followed by many other legitimate and valid reasons.
Once the remaining two-thirds of the WMD sites have been thoroughly examined and nothing is found... only after the US has ruled out the possibility that Saddam shipped WMD to his terrorist neighbors... and only after its been concluded that WMD were not destroyed by Saddam's henchmen prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom start-up... then and only then will you be able to reach the conclusions you've reached on this thread.
So far, PresBush is sitting pretty. The American people trust the President and he continues to receive overwhelming support for his remarkable leadership. If you are bothered by that, too bad.
Contradicting myself? Please read my threads *before* the war I alway said that IMHO my humble opinion the real reason for the war was to build a counterweight to Saudi Arabia. I have been entirely consistent on this point unlike many pro-warriors who once used WMD as their lead scare argument but now have shifted to "liberation" etc.
Now it is true that the *stated* reason given by policymakers before the war was primarily was WMD. I am arguing that they were making a largely a cynical ploy to misled Americans to bring about their own hidden agendas (e.g. building a counterweight to Saudi Arabia). Politicians often have hidden agendas. Why is this so difficult to understand?