Anyone got an answer????
 

December, 2004: the bush administration says "No WMDs".

Fair enough...

September 10, 2006: VP Dick Cheney, on national TV ("Meet the Press"),
says: "Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11".

Fair enough...

....but then the question *BEGS* to be asked-- If no WMDs and Iraq had
nothing to do with 9/11, then...

WHAT IN THE HELL ARE WE DOING THERE????

Anything we can tell the parents of the 2600 dead American kids?

Anything we can tell the 19,000 wounded American kids?

Anything we can tell the 30,000 innocent dead Iraqi civilians?

Any reason at all that we invaded a sovereign nation, sent it to wrack
and ruin?

Anything we can tell the American taxpayers why they spent hundreds of
*B*illions of dollars on nothing?

Anyone got an answer? Any one of you rabid bush acolytes care to
step up to the plate and venture a reason as to why we are in Iraq--now
that they themselves have denied both of their fundamental reasons for
starting the war?

(Sorry if your leader (Cheney) and his sock puppet (bush) pulled the rug
out from under whatever reason you might offer).

Anyone got an answer????
 

Jor-El wrote in news:K3kNg.415$TV3.265
@newssvr21.news.prodigy.com:


I have: Hmmm

Anyone got an answer????
 

"Jor-El" wrote in message
. ..


Oh goody, another whining liberal with no answers.

Anyone got an answer????
 

Sam Nunn would say,it's Wahr.
cuhulin

Revisionist History. Antiwar myths about Iraq, debunked
 

Revisionist History. Antiwar myths about Iraq, debunked

Peter Wehner systematically discredits allegations made by Bush critics and
antiwar critics.Wehner examines and delegitimizes allegations that United
States people were misled when convinced to enter the war in Iraq, the Bush
administration pressured intelligence agencies, and Saddam posed a limited
threat because weapons of mass destruction were never found.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editor...l?id=110008415

Anyone got an answer????
 

Anyone got an answer????
 

Jor-El wrote:

wrote:
Jor-El wrote:
December, 2004: the bush administration says "No WMDs".


...but then the question *BEGS* to be asked-- If no WMDs and Iraq had
nothing to do with 9/11, then...

WHAT IN THE HELL ARE WE DOING THERE????

First, you mis-interpreted the question. What was meant was "why were we
there in the first place"? Under what pretext now that the
Administration has disavowed -both- of their two main reasons they said
we should be there.

- Not Cutting and Running ??

Finally, "cutting and running" is no longer an issue anymore...truly a
moot point because...

junior bush has painted us into the perfect corner:

--bad things continue to happen if we stay. The counter on the number of
dead American kids will keep ticking higher and higher. The Iraqis had
their "free elections", they've had their shot at democracy, blah, blah,
blah, and the situation has done nothing but go downhill and continue to
worsen. (Gee, big surprise, right? Like we're going to change a thousand
years of their tribal fighting).

--bad things will happen if we leave. (civil war, more destabilization
of the mid east).

No wrong answers are possible about staying vs. leaving. BOTH sides are
right. The USA painted into the -perfect- corner by Georgie. :-(

Wow! Carter-K8VT is also Jor-El the comic book reader!

LMFAO

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Revisionist History. Antiwar myths about Iraq, debunked
 

And what does this crap have to do with shortwave radio listening ?
You bored or something ?

"Der Fuehrer Mahmoud Ahmadinejad" wrote in
message ...
Revisionist History. Antiwar myths about Iraq, debunked

Peter Wehner systematically discredits allegations made by Bush critics
and
antiwar critics.Wehner examines and delegitimizes allegations that United
States people were misled when convinced to enter the war in Iraq, the
Bush
administration pressured intelligence agencies, and Saddam posed a limited
threat because weapons of mass destruction were never found.

http://www.opinionjournal.com/editor...l?id=110008415

Anyone got an answer????
 

In article ,
dxAce wrote:

Jor-El wrote:

wrote:
Jor-El wrote:
December, 2004: the bush administration says "No WMDs".


...but then the question *BEGS* to be asked-- If no WMDs and Iraq had
nothing to do with 9/11, then...

WHAT IN THE HELL ARE WE DOING THERE????

First, you mis-interpreted the question. What was meant was "why were we
there in the first place"? Under what pretext now that the
Administration has disavowed -both- of their two main reasons they said
we should be there.

- Not Cutting and Running ??

Finally, "cutting and running" is no longer an issue anymore...truly a
moot point because...

junior bush has painted us into the perfect corner:

--bad things continue to happen if we stay. The counter on the number of
dead American kids will keep ticking higher and higher. The Iraqis had
their "free elections", they've had their shot at democracy, blah, blah,
blah, and the situation has done nothing but go downhill and continue to
worsen. (Gee, big surprise, right? Like we're going to change a thousand
years of their tribal fighting).

--bad things will happen if we leave. (civil war, more destabilization
of the mid east).

No wrong answers are possible about staying vs. leaving. BOTH sides are
right. The USA painted into the -perfect- corner by Georgie. :-(

Wow! Carter-K8VT is also Jor-El the comic book reader!

LMFAO

Yeah and he has been a few others but who is counting.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California