Lazy Senior wrote:

Bill wrote:




And what if they had worded thus "Would you be willing to pay $666 so
that we can begin breaking up the radical muslim gang of thugs that
just killed 4000 innocent Americans and threaten to kill more?"


-BM


Dont try to re-write history, the Iraq War had nothing to do with 9-11

Then you explain to me why the US went into Iraq? To steal the oil from
them? Cuz Saddam threatened to kill Dubya's daddy? To build that
pipeline across the country to the Caspian Sea? (no, wait, that was
Afghanistan). Just to fill the pockets of Dubya and his cronies with cash?

Think like an mature adult. Iraq has nothing directly to do with Bali I
and II, Madrid bombings, London bombings, pushing Irving Klinghoffer off
of a cruise ship in his wheelchair, Beirut hostage taking, chopping off
Daniel Perl's head...on and on for the past 30 years. But what they DID
have was WMDs and a propensity to use them against their own internal
enemies and a sympathy with the nutcases waging war against the West.
Its pretty clear that Saddam's Iraq had the MOST resources at the
disposal of factions like the 9/11 murderers and was a good place to
start.

You cannot separate 9/11 from today's Iraq. The little mini-incidents
that the radical muslims have perpetrated against the West pale in
comparison to the 4000 lives lost right here on US soil. To not do
something about it would be folly. If 9/11 had not occurred, we
wouldn't be there. In that sense Iraq has much to do with 9/11.

I respect the people who must make these bold decisions and the
foot-soldiers obliged to carry out the task. I'm neither a politician
or a military strategist - and subsequently I'm not a Monday Morning
Quarterback calling the game that isn't finished yet. I'm glad this
type of whining "it costs every taxpayer $xxx" didn't happen in 1944.
Back then "Blame America First" wasn't very fashionable.

-Bill