so much backtracking............

[kronas]

george bush, and vice president dick cheney, have both bactracked on earlier statements that IRAQ had weapons of mass destruction, they have conceded that he (saddam hussein) was only a 'threat' and had the 'potential' to create WMD.

Before the invasion of Iraq 11 months ago, Bush and Cheney both argued that Iraq was an urgent threat to the United States, stating with certainty that Iraq had chemical and biological arms and had rebuilt a nuclear weapons program. "Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised," Bush said in March 2003.

source: washingtonpost

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp...nguage=printer

why dont they just conced to the fact THEY GOT IT WRONG, its also interesting to note that the actual investigation in to intelligence that was handed down to bush wont arrive untill next march.

he just wanted to 'finish' saddam off ?

[Jerrek]

Lets not forget all the Democrats who supported him too, such as Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Kerry, Edwards, Lieberman, Gephardt, etc.

[Paul M]

Is anyone else getting just a bit fed up of the whole subject ? - three letters I am really getting bored to death of hearing about day after day - WMD.

[Jerrek]

I agree. The intelligence may not have been up-to-date, but at that time, it was the best course of action, and I still believe it was the best course of action. If Iraqis could vote, who do you think they'll vote for? Saddam Hussein or Bush?


Meanwhile, Rummie says it like it is. http://www.nytimes.com/2004/02/08/in...rtner=USERLAND

Mr. Rumsfeld placed the blame for the war squarely on Saddam Hussein for his "deception and defiance," and refusal to abandon his illegal weapons program, as Libya did recently.

"It was his choice," Mr. Rumsfeld said in a speech here to an audience of 250 government ministers, lawmakers and national security experts from 30 countries, most of them in Europe. "If the Iraqi regime had taken the same steps Libya is now taking, there would have been no war."



In this climate, many officials here expected a tempered, if not conciliatory speech on Saturday from Mr. Rumsfeld, who is still regarded by many Germans and French, in particular, as a villain for his dismissive remarks about "old Europe." Instead, Mr. Rumsfeld, feisty and unyielding, appeared eager to put a potential adversary on the defensive as he laid out the administration's rationale for the war in the absence of any illegal Iraqi weapons.

"Think about what was going on in Iraq a year ago with people being tortured, rape rooms, mass graves, gross corruption, a country that has used chemical weapons against its own people," he said in response to a question, his voice rising, his hands chopping the air for emphasis.

He then turned the question back on the audience. "There were prominent people from representative countries in this room that opined that they really didn't think it made a hell of a lot of difference who won," he said, nearly shouting. "Shocking. Absolutely shocking."

[bopdude]

Originally Posted by Jerrek

If Iraqis could vote, who do you think they'll vote for? Saddam Hussein or Bush?

Not sure about the vote but its clear by the ongoing struggle that the Iraqis arn't to keen on the " invasion " into their country, don't get me wrong, i'm all for getting rid of all the despot leadships in the world but where do you stop ?

One thing for sure, it ain't over yet IMHO that is

[downquark1]

Any thoughts about him calling himself a war president?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3470139.stm

I love this stance. 'It's not our fault, Saddam tricked us by telling the truth'

[Stuart]

Do you think this is a sign of things to come?
"He told NBC's Meet the Press that the US should accept greater spending because the nation was at war."

So, lower taxes & greater spending...Assuming he actually does that, I can forsee problems..

[downquark1]

Originally Posted by scastle

So, lower taxes & greater spending...Assuming he actually does that, I can forsee problems..

It reminds me a some executives looting a company before it goes down.