We do not know what was in the mind of Bush and the people who wanted us to invade Iraq but that was the plan from his first Cabinet meeting long before 9/11. We did not go to war because of the danger from actual or potential WMD. If that was the reason we went to war we would be at war all over the world. How many countries with dicators have WMD or the desire to acquire WMD? Yes we are misallocating our resources in Iraq and we are charging the entire amount to the debt for our children to pay. In addition, we have enabled a terrorist operation in Iraq were none existed before we started the Iraq War!

We did not go to war because of the danger from actual or potential WMD. If that was the reason we went to war we would be at war all over the world. How many countries with dicators have WMD or the desire to acquire WMD?

Stop using that stupid arguement that just because you don't go after everybody at once, it's just not worth it. You cannot go after every dictator at the same time, you have to start somewhere.

Yes we are misallocating our resources in Iraq and we are charging the entire amount to the debt for our children to pay. In addition, we have enabled a terrorist operation in Iraq were none existed before we started the Iraq War!

There already was a terrorist operation in Iraq before the war. Al zaqarwi was already there.

You cannot go after every dictator at the same time, you have to start somewhere.

Is this not illegal under international law? This is a deeply worrying statement.

There already was a terrorist operation in Iraq before the war. Al zaqarwi was already there

They may well have been terrorists active, there definitely are now and at greater numbers than ever before. Don't try and hide behind arguments like this

And on the other hand "we" don't understand people like you either

How do you know what I am like, or have you branded me a liberal, or a lefty, just because I have questions the decisions of the Bush adminstration, thereby negating anything I say and consigning my opinion to the junk pile?

Is this not illegal under international law? This is a deeply worrying statement

Was it illegal when Clinton went after Melosivic?

They may well have been terrorists active, there definitely are now and at greater numbers than ever before. Don't try and hide behind arguments like this

I am not hiding behind anything.

I am not hiding behind anything.

Good responding argument....I am now convinced of everything you say.....hmmm

Was it illegal when Clinton went after Melosivic?

Milosevic was carrying out an ethnic cleansing policy, causing millions of refugees to flee the country, and is a completely different case to Saddam and Iraq

Good responding argument....I am now convinced of everything you say.....hmmm

I'm not trying to convice you, no matter what I say you will believe what you want.

Milosevic was carrying out an ethnic cleansing policy, causing millions of refugees to flee the country, and is a completely different case to Saddam and Iraq

Not really. Saddam was putting 10 of thousands of people in mass graves, gassing his own people, widespread torture, and invading neighboring countries. Tell me again how it's a different case.

A smart person starts where the most impact will be felt. To fight terrorism that WAS NOT IRAQ. For the most part, Iraq under Saddam was a Rogue state and not a hot bed for terrorism. It is a far more active site for terrorism today then before we started the war. Thus, we misalloceted our resources because we did not use them aginst the greatest threat to our security. Our security was just an encuse used by Bush to do what he planned on doing BEFORE we were worried about terrorism in the US (9/11).

Our security was just an encuse used by Bush to do what he planned on doing BEFORE we were worried about terrorism in the US (9/11).

Did the people in the black helicopters tell you that?

Not really. Saddam was putting 10 of thousands of people in mass graves, gassing his own people, widespread torture, and invading neighboring countries. Tell me again how it's a different case.

No right thinking person would deny that Saddam was "a bad man" and that it is better that he is not in charge of a country.

I think my problem is how is was justified beforehand and has been justified since. Getting into a dictator comparison will get us no where

I would prefer not to distrust my elected representatives, on the global stage.

But, let me quote myself:

This forum was never about the rights and wrongs of the war!

No, Bush has documented that by stating the danger from countries like Iran, Seria and North Korea. No intelligence or military expert I have listened to has said we are SAFER. Just because there has not been another attack in the US is NO proof we are safer. Look at how long a time passed from the first and second attacks on the Twin Towers. OUR homeland security is more active but even there there are problems like our ports and borders which Bush has not addresses in almost FOUR YEARS. WHY NOT?

No intelligence or military expert I have listened to has said we are SAFER.

You mean just the one's you choose to listen to.

Look at how long a time passed from the first and second attacks on the Twin Towers.

Yes, by not waging war after the first attack on our country, Clinton showed weakness and gave the terrorists more time to prepare. We are at war now, the terrorists are on the run now.

Yes, by not waging war after the first attack on our country, Clinton showed weakness and gave the terrorists more time to prepare. We are at war now, the terrorists are on the run now.

Are you meaning to present yourself as an American caricature?

Hmm, that was a conversation stopper!