Should not the headline for this article have been:

What was more important, surge or the decision to go to mission?

How often we read about the Revolutionary Mission, the Civil Mission, World Mission I, World Mission II, the Korean Mission, the Vietnam Mission, etc. Mission and war are synonymous?

The USS Abraham Lincoln had a mission, a task, an assignment, an operational role as part of the war effort. The crew of the USS Abraham Lincoln accomplished their mission.

Liberals mocked Bush. How stupid he was, how incapable of critical thinking and nuance. How non-curious he was. Yet liberals seem to have a terrible time with simple 4th grade definitions.

Of course the liberal elite know the distinction and difference between war and mission. The whole smear was a juvenile, partisan word manipulation to marginalize a President they didn't like. That is fine, happens every day on both sides of the isle.

But, when it marginalizes a Commander in Chief in a time of war, when its intention is to erode support for the troops' mission and when it emboldens the enemy and undoubtedly results in unnecessary deaths to American servicemen, its despicable.

And partisan fools laugh.

I've posted this before and it needs to be dusted off. EVERYONE thought Saddam had WMDs! Even before Bush got into office. Clinton bombed Saddam during his impeachment hearings!!!

What Did The Democrats Say About Iraq's WMD?

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

L_mob seeing your moniker I doubt you will listen to reason but...

Notice how all of your quotes talk about weapon's inspectors leaving Iraq in 1998? Your quotes from 2002 from the Democrats say things like we believe he has weapons. The Dems were looking at the intelligence presented by the CIA or should I call it cooked books and assumptions that the Downing street memo talk about.

http://downingstreetmemo.com/

The inspectors that went back in there prior to the war in 2002 were not able to fully negate the possibility of Sadamm having WMD. Bush pulled them out and chose to listen to 'Curveball' and other Iraqi defectors instead. He listened to people like Ahmed Chalabi, remember that corrupt guy stealing from his country and later thrown under the bus by Bush and Co.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/meast/10/10/iraq.curveball/index.html

In fact even after Powell's speech to the UN to garner support for the war; inspectors under Blix and Baradei wanted to continue their work. Bush not wanting to be proven wrong, or knowing he would be proven wrong if he didn't act fast, didn't wait for them to confirm one way or the other. So he pushed for a UN resolution to allow force.

Before you post drivel like, we also invaded because Iraq had UN sanctions against them. Well our ally Israel also has sanctions against them in their dealings with the Palestinians and we haven't invaded them.

Bottom line - NO weapons found or ever in existence according to the AP.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,154574,00.html

I don't think there's any argument that we went into Iraq under false information. I think the reason the Republicans are screaming for Obama to admit he was wrong was because he was so dead set on the surge. Unfortunately for him, it worked. Fortunately for everyone else. Iraq is far from stable, but we didn't leave in the midst of a civil war. We left when the Iraqi government wanted to take responsibility. So now we can claim we didn't run with our tails between our legs. We did everything we needed to do (including back alley deals) to make sure that it didn't appear as a defeat. And that was not only important to those that unfortunately perished for the cause, but for those that would use a defeat as propaganda for hope of defeating our country. Obama can spin it as even though he didn't believe in the surge, he believed in the Secretary of Defense, and that is why he kept him on his staff. If he's smart he'll spin it that way. Otherwise, republicans will be licking their chops.

Actually, Lynchmob's list could be longer than a June, Fl post.

BTW, Hillary referred to her sources, not trusting Bush.

Do people that can't find their keys, say "well I guess they never existed!" Specious argument.

Another funny thing about all of this is that out of the Axis of Evil, Iraq according to liberals, turns out to be the only one who didn't have a Nuclear program! Everyone with a functioning brain stem (sorry to leave some of FR regulars out) understands N. Korea already had it. Bush made sure Iraq and Libya didn't get one. Israel made sure of Syria for the time being. That leaves Iran whose baby is in the basket.

Tragic thing is, there were many credible reports that Iran had stopped their program about the time Saddam was dragged out of his hole and Libya called up wanting us to come take their stuff.

Carter facilitated the birth of Iranian radicalism and sponsorship of terrorism. Obama has facilitated the birth of their bomb. And the left calls these two guys geniuses / Bush ignorant?

nice

Ever notice how the Republicans rely on meaningless words to justify their reasoning and logic for mass murder? Define success or mission accomplished? Our mission is to wipe out a generation of this nation's peasants' children while the rich pig, war lovers never send their children to the front lines for all of these glorious causes? How glorious would Bush/Mac and all the mass murderers be if their children had died for the glorious, so democratic cause? Who appointed this nation the world's dictators; do it our way or no way, mentality?

Even in WWI, the peasants's children came to realize they had been "eye washed" to commit mass murder and booed their generals that chanted, even if you die, the war will be "wonderful, glorious". It would appear this nation's mass murderers have not evolved since the Neandethals clubbed everything that moved.

And, the billions of dollars spent on mass murder! What could this nation have done with all the monies poured into Iraq and the slaughter of one million innocent Iraqi civilians, mostly women and children.

It is never about ethics and character but always the salesman and his pitch for glories, heroes, freedoms and democracies -- the inherent, god-given right to blow up the Earth and kill the planet, mass murder a defenseless, much weaker nation [Iraq didn't even have fighter jets to defend itself] and glorify the evil with bottomless, meaningless words that, however translated or spinned, spell the Dark Ages, bullies and evil. Of course, Europeans were correct; Bush was the bully prez, and this nation, the bully nation.

Ever notice how wackos rely on words for meaningless thought snot?

I had a great exchange deleted when the top comment was deleted for whatever reason. so Rick i agree that needs to be changed.

Not a rhetorical questions to liberals. Is Bush an Idiot or an evil genius that got the backing of congress?

Its either "He's a redneck moron"

Or "He tricked us"

How can it be both?

And if it is then how dumb do you have to be to be tricked by a redneck moron. ?

Republicans during Clinton's military action in Bosnia

“Victory means exit strategy, and it’s important for the President to explain to us what the exit strategy is.”
–Governor George W. Bush (R-TX)

“You can support the troops but not the president.”
–Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

“Well, I just think it’s a bad idea. What’s going to happen is they’re going to be over there for 10, 15, maybe 20 years.”
–Joe Scarborough (R-FL)

“Explain to the mothers and fathers of American servicemen that may come home in body bags why their son or daughter have to give up their life?”
–Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/6/99

“[The] President . . . is once again releasing American military might on a foreign country with an ill-defined objective and no exit strategy. He has yet to tell the Congress how much this operation will cost. And he has not informed our nation’s armed forces about how long they will be away from home. These strikes do not make for a sound foreign policy.”
–Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA)

“If we are going to commit American troops, we must be certain they have a clear mission, an achievable goal and an exit strategy.”
–Karen Hughes, speaking on behalf of George W Bush

“I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning . . I didn’t think we had done enough in the diplomatic area.”
–Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

“I cannot support a failed foreign policy. History teaches us that it is often easier to make war than peace. This administration is just learning that lesson right now. The President began this mission with very vague objectives and lots of unanswered questions. A month later, these questions are still unanswered. There are no clarified rules of engagement. There is no timetable. There is no legitimate definition of victory. There is no contingency plan for mission creep. There is no clear funding program. There is no agenda to bolster our over-extended military. There is no explanation defining what vital national interests are at stake. There was no strategic plan for war when the President started this thing, and there still is no plan today”
–Rep Tom Delay (R-TX)

"No goal, no objective, not until we have those things and a compelling case is made, then I say, back out of it, because innocent people are going to die for nothing. That's why I'm against it."

-Sean Hannity, Fox News, 4/5/99

"I had doubts about the bombing campaign from the beginning...I didn't think we had done enough in the diplomatic area."

-Senator Trent Lott (R-MS)

"You think Vietnam was bad? Vietnam is nothing next to Kosovo."

-Tony Snow, Fox News 3/24/99

"I'm on the Senate Intelligence Committee, so you can trust me and believe me when I say we're running out of cruise missles. I can't tell you exactly how many we have left, for security reasons, but we're almost out of cruise missles."

-Senator Inhofe (R-OK )

"I don't know that Milosevic will ever raise a white flag"

-Senator Don Nickles (R-OK)

"This is President Clinton's war, and when he falls flat on his face, that's his problem."

-Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN)

"The two powers that have ICBMs that can reach the United States are Russia and China. Here we go in. We're taking on not just Milosevic. We can't just say, 'that little guy, we can whip him.' We have these two other powers that have missiles that can reach us, and we have zero defense thanks to this president."

Actually most intelligent people weren't tricked, just the morons in congress. Bush always had a priority of taking down Saddam (he threatened daddy) Just ask O'Neil, his first treasury secretary.

When intelligence is altered to present the military industrialist postition for ripping off the American people, then that is treason. Dick Cheaney and George Bush are back stabbing traitors.

"Not a rhetorical questions to liberals. Is Bush an Idiot or an evil genius that got the backing of congress?"

George W. Bush is an idiot. Dick Cheney is an evil genius.

Dick Cheney personally met with members of Congress and scared the beejubus out of them, as only Cheney can.

I was not fooled. I watched Powell's presentation in front of the UN and said "I don't think so."

I protested against the invasion of Iraq, as did many people. I well remember hearing Howard Dean on the radio - the only voice of reason in the run up to the war. Yes, Democrats should have done more to stop the invasion. BUt, you remember, George Bush had an approval rating topping 60% post 9/11 and the whole country was inclined to "follow the leader."

Next time, the country should listen to ME.

I wasn't fooled. For all the reasons Yellowdog cited I thought we were being led down the primrose path even then. I was very upset that we were doing this with no real exist strategy, looking for something (WMD) that might not even exist in a country that was not a threat. Those of us on this thread weren't the only ones either, the people who were right were just shouted down by the people who were wrong.

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/02/15/sprj.irq.protests.main/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protests_against_the_Iraq_War

All this thread is so far is more proof that neither party within our government knows what the hell they're doing at any given time, and that when they stake out a position that turns out to be wrong, they'll stab whomever is within range in the back to save their own skin.

"I was against it before I was for it, but I'm against it again." yadda yadda yadda

And somehow some of you seem to think anyone deserves credit for anything that occured as a result of this misbegotten war? It is to laugh.

I only have one question: When does Obama get our people out of Afg? Aug. '11? It is to laugh, again. When does he let the Patriot Act expire? When does he close Gitmo?

Let him have his credit, he can have blood on his hands as he deserves, nevermind that the exit strategy was in place before he even won the election - the only thing he did was attach a specific date.

It was a war that never should have been fought, and I was actually giving him credit for ending it finally. No more.

Yellowdog,

About the Blix bs.

Hans himself remarked in January 2003 -

"Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance-not even today-of the disarmament, which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to win confidence of the world and to live in peace."

He additionally noted among other things that 1,000 tons of chemical agent were unaccounted for, critical information regarding the VX nerve agent program was missing, no credible evidence was presented for the destruction of 8,500 litres of Anthrax, etc........

The left always wants to prosecute the past. Hey, folks, Barry has a really s#itty economy on his hands - let's not be too distracted by the irrelevance of who did what when and get back to policies that will enable our economy to move forward.

all of the wmd's were sent to syria the day before the invasion.even saddam's top people have admitted to this.so keep on telling the same lie over and over again,but the real crime here is the fact that we have not left iraq in a better place than it was.

Amy B-Some of your quotes are four years after the U.S. was removed from Bosnia. LOL Nato was involved with only 8500 U.S. troops remaining in the country for peace keeping duties. AFTER a peace accord was created. If Nato would get involved with Iraq, I feel as if we could have a much smaller presence there too. Instead, we are still the main peacekeeper. Apples to oranges.

Greg, that was a known stockpile from YEARS before, far too small to produce any useful nuclear program, sitting in a warehouse in a country too weakened by years of sanctions to undertake such an enterprise. The article states that the drums were old and leaking. That's because the stuff was there dating back to the days when we counted Saddam as a FRIEND, thanks in part to the efforts of George HW Bush. In no way was it connected to the phony yellowcake scare that resulted in the smear of Ambassador Wilson and outing of Valerie Plame.

If you think all of us who believe the war in Iraq was wrong are in error please feel free to tell us why. If you can't do that you aren't arguing, you're just reflexively disagreeing.

The problem, John, isn't that people disagree that the war was in error.

The problem is the way some people frame the debate. As in, "Bush lied!!!!!", "It was Bushs (aka Hitler) Oil War!!!!" "The Bush/Cheney war machine ruined this country!!!!" Browbeating and hyperbole.

Reasonable people from virtually all sides of the political spectrum can agree that in the fullness of time it has become clear that the war was an enormous mistake with catastrophic costs - in human lives, in money, in judgement, in ways too numerous to mention. They will not, however, agree when one side tries to demonize anyone and everyone who doesn't join in on the hyperbole.

Once committed, with bi-partisan support in Congress and support from the international community AND a large level of support from the American people (72%, see the Pew link below), what would you have Bush do differently once it was determined that the WMDs intelligence was false - just leave? Go in, blow the country to shreds and kick Saddam out, then say oops and split? Can you imagine the justifiable outrage then?

http://pewresearch.org/pubs/770/iraq-war-five-year-anniversary

Famously, hindsight is 20/20.

The far-left is loosing the argument in the court of public opinion, not necessarily because they're wrong but because of the terms upon which they decide the discussion must be held which are insulting, hyperbolic and intolerant. People that disagree with them get called racists, bigots, war mongers, capitalist pigs, and uneducated philistines - and that's just what I've seen on these vines today.

The war in Iraq is ending, finally. We are still fighting in Afg, at increased levels. Why? While I disagree with Obama on redirecting resources from Iraq to Afg, I agree fully with him on one thing:

Can we just turn the page on Iraq? The past cannot be changed, and if the page can't be turned yet, can we at least elevate the debate to a level of mutual respect?

Your premise is wrong, and you probably know that. This is what is so maddening.

"Famously, hindsight is 20/20."

You know this is a lie. One you apologists use to avoid thorough investigations.

Hindsight is only 20/20 when the information provided to you is unredacted and declassified. And the people responsible for vouching for that information are compelled to do so under oath.

None of that has happened yet, so we're unwilling to "turn the page"; another version of "now is not the time" or "let's move on, and not look back."

There is no mutual respect possible when the first thing you do in our discussion is to insult our intelligence with these kinds of lies.

Your premise is wrong, and you probably know that. This is what is so maddening.

"Famously, hindsight is 20/20."

You know this is a lie. One you apologists use to avoid thorough investigations.

Hindsight is only 20/20 when the information provided to you is unredacted and declassified. And the people responsible for vouching for that information are compelled to do so under oath.

None of that has happened yet, so we're unwilling to "turn the page"; another version of "now is not the time" or "let's move on, and not look back."

There is no mutual respect possible when the first thing you do in our discussion is to insult our intelligence with these kinds of lies.

For the truth watch the Iraq War Inquiry in UK and specifically the UN inspector Hans Blitz who fd no WMD and told us and the UK that. Also, the whole plan was about regime change. We killed over a hundren thousand Iraqi's, killed over 4400 of our soldiers, wounded over 30K soldiers, cost a trillion in direct money and several more trillion in treating the wounded. Was it worth it for Bush/Cheney's ego-I think not. Also, it added to our debt.

We were lied into war by false information which was verified a week before the invasion. The one person who said there was a meeting was totally discredited.

Great, more name calling from Paul. I'm an "apologist" who "insulted OUR intelligence", trying to be rational? You must have a turd in your pocket, who's "our"? You weren't even involved in the thread prior to that douchey post. Who's blocking investigations, Dems own the government right now.

If either of you conspiracy theorists can prove ANY of your wild bullcrap claims, then get thee with haste to Holder's office because if what you CLAIM is true is actually true, no one would like to see Bush and whomever else tried more than I would.

If there IS believable proof and not a bunch of he said - she said nonsense, and Holder isn't acting on it.....? Why? Because now it's Obama taking money from Halliburton. No, I can't prove that any more than you can prove your crap. Do you believe Bush orchestrated 9/11, too?

Ah, but that's another part of controlling the conversation. At the time those of us who disagreed were called unreasonable, unpatriotic, and as often as not traitorous. Imagine that we're a little crabby about being told by the same people that we should now be "reasonable", give GW credit for doing the right thing, and step aside to let the real experts do their thing. These are the people who were wrong then, wrong throughout, and thereby have demonstrated their inability to be trusted or relied upon.

You have to first have an investigation before you can have a prosecution. Holder isn't going to conduct the investigation but he will be happy to appoint the special prosecutor when the information has been declassified. Let us try to be PRAGMATIC about this.

Only a half-wit would think that anyone in the truther community believes that George W. Bush planned 9/11.

GB Mamma: Amen. It's very convenient to ignore the "issue" that we should never have gone to war with Iraq in the first place...the elephant in the room, if you will.

Simple question, simple answer: "Who wants to ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" http://usliberals.about.com/od/extraordinaryspeeches/a/KerryVietnam.htm

It was the right question in 1971 and it's the only question that should have been asked in 2003.

Lmob,

The inspectors knew there were no wmd's. I think many knew there weren't any. But everyone knows there is oil! If you don't know what this war was/is about by now, you never will.

Dan Austin, Tx

Obama will admit the success of the surge once Dick Cheney admits what an utter failure the Bush Administration was in all aspects. How many U.S. and Iraqi lives were destroyed because Bush/Cheney didn't have a real plan in place for Iraq? So now after 7 years you think George deserves a high five and a "job well done". This is why it's too much to ask to take these republicans seriously.

Two can play the question game Bohner and McCain. Why do you only open your mouths when sh!t is coming out? Any ideas about Bin Laden? how to fix the job situation here in the U.S.? I won't hold my breath.

Dan, I agree

This is, as I said in First Thoughts, Machismos of Vast Right-Wing schemes to further the idea that Bush actually did something right .

President Obama should acknowledge that George W. Bush's troop surge worked?

Gimme a break! P-l-e-a-z-z-z-z-ze the President should tell the truth and let America know he is giving Bush credit for being a WAR MONGER AND .

Besides, it was the "Sunni Awakening" which led to the surge so the LIAR-IN-CHIEF, Bush deserves no credit.

The Only thing thats Important about this subject, is How Americans were so easily duped into believing Saddam Hussein was behind 911.

The very samething is going on now as Americans(if you Eat Poll Toasties for breakfast) are being led to believe, that the same people who led Us into this War, are telling You, they know what it takes to get America moving again.

America, if your Train of Thought remains with these Engineers, there aint enough CrossTies to laydown, to keep the Train on the Track!

Sorry Bev. didn't mean to step on your previous statement. I came to the site late and hadn't read through all the topics yet. :^)

Rick: I agree with you but wouldn't say the American people were easily duped. Fear is how everyone was manipulated into following along with this madness. It was obvious shortly after entering Iraq that it was all a sham. What I find interesting about this particular subject is how so many fools don't want to admit that from start to finish this war was ill conceived and poorly executed.

Rick, KY Brilliant observation here and also on your initial on this thread. Nothing like good ol' down home redneck common sense, right? Love your posts

Dan Austin, Tx

Sorry Bev. didn't mean to step on your previous statement. I came to the site late and hadn't read through all the topics yet. :^)

Dan, there is no need to apologize. I'm glad you picked up the conservation. Do it again by all means. We need to have this conversation. I happy you repeated it.

Belive me, you only enhanced the truth!!!

I understand we can't read every post when we ourselves have so much to say.

You know, Rick, you're not the first person to say this, but I have to ask: who ever said that Saddam Hussein was responsible for 9/11?

I certainly never heard it. I do recall hearing that Al Queda might or might not be in discussions with him, but there was never any proof of that, at least, that I saw.

I heard discussions that the 9/11 attacks might have occurred because of our percieved weakness-shown in Somalia. I heard discussions that it might have happened because we left Saddam in charge after the first Gulf War, again, because of perceptions of our weakness.

Never, once, do I recall Bush blaming 9/11 on Saddam, although I have heard that he asked the question in the immediate aftermath of the attack. He was not alone. My neighbors and I, gathering that night after those of them who were caught in the attack made it home,(sadly, three did not), discussed this at great length. We questioned it, too.

Is that what you are basing this on?

no joe:

Bush administration on Iraq 9/11 link

"Mr Bush has never directly accused the former Iraqi leader of having a hand in the attacks on New York and Washington, but he has repeatedly associated the two in keynote addresses delivered since 11 September. Senior members of his administration have similarly conflated the two.

A recent opinion poll suggests that 70% of Americans believe the Iraqi leader was personally involved in the attacks.

Despite his stated rejection of any clear link between Saddam Hussein and the events of that day, Mr Bush continues to assert that the deposed president had ties with al-Qaeda, the terrorist network blamed for the 11 September attacks."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3119676.stm

The article goes on to list several instances where the Bush Administration implied a link between Iraq and Al-Quaeda/9-11, including this:

President Bush speaking in Cincinnati, Ohio, in October, 2002, in which he laid out the threat he believed Iraq posed:

Before 11 September 2001, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents and lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained. Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons, and other plans - this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take just one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known.

President Bush in his State of the Union address, January 2003. He made these comments in the context of the links he perceived between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda:

The terrorists have lost a sponsor in Iraq. And no terrorist networks will ever gain weapons of mass destruction from Saddam Hussein's regime.

President Bush in a televised address to defend his administration's policy on Iraq, September 2003:

We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after 11 September, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.

Some citizens wonder, after 11 years of living with this problem, why do we need to confront it now? And there's a reason. We've experienced the horror of 11 September.

Happy to help.

I know you did'nt hear about That, NJ, you Never heard Sarah & Newt say anything about the Mosque, either.

But everyone on 1st Read knows you hear little voices(Polls), all thru the day.

You betcha!

Thanx Nash

Sorry, Nash, but the first sentence says it all:Mr. Bush has never directly accused the former Iraqi leader of having a hand in the attacks. . . Then there is :Despite his stated rejection of any clear link between Saddam Hussein and the events of that day. . ."

If people want to read into things what they wills, that is their doing. If Bush "never directly accused" Hussein, and, in fact, ". .stated his rejection of any clear link between Hussein and the events", I fail to see that it is his fault that there are some who believe that there was a link.

I don't see a lot of difference between those who believe that Hussein was responsible for 9/11, and those who believe that Obama was born in some other country and/or is a Muslim.

There is no cure for ignorance-and, unfortunately, the most ignorant are often the most outspoken.

no joe:

I post the information . . . make of it whatever you want . . . you asked where the idea came from. . . that's where.

Thats pretty appropriate NJ, you admit to discussing it with your naybors, then call yourself Ignorant !

I knew the Shoe fit the description!

no joe, no bo, nj

Can you quote when and where Bush made those statements? Also, public statements usually are not the inner thoughts and feelings of a politician.

Man its frightening that the righties are trying to rewrite history about the massive cluster that was the Iraq war buildup, failed strategies and political blunders that caused thousands of US deaths, tens of thousands of US injuries and hundreds of thousands of Iraqi casulties.

Man its frightening that the righties are trying to rewrite history about the massive cluster that was the Iraq war buildup....

No where has that been said. Most people, left and right, will agree that we made huge mistakes going into Iraq and how we first handled the war. However, rather than simply saying oops I underestimated the violence that would take place, Bush put a plan into place that did work. Yes he screwed up in the first place, but he did fix it. It's amazing how many on the left want to disregard that fact. Like it or not, the surge worked. While it would have been nice to avoid it, that was not the reality. In the long run, the cost of the surge and stabilizing Iraq will be seen as a benefit both to Iraw and the U.S. It was Bush's plan and not Obama's and for Obama to even try to take credit for it and not recognize Bush is laughable.

Doing the wrong thing well is never a valid excuse. And he didn't even do it well.

Bush is the war criminal that lied to the public about the reason for invading a defenseless country and causing the deaths of hundreds of thousand of people. Obama is the President trying to cover up the entire Countries complicity in these crimes without causing America to lose what little good faith the world has left for us. Iraq is not better off today for what we have done and the chaos continues in Iraq. In the end Obama and Bush are one and the same; they both believe in American Imperialism and manifest destiny and they are both representatives of the elite and the multinational corporations.

There are many reasons why the Iraq war was and is illegal and the UN declared it so. Until Bush and Cheney are tried by the American public we have lost our moral authority to tell other nations how to act or what weapons they can have. We have become what we hate most. A belligerent Nation that puts itself above the law yet demands everyone else to abide by it, or perish.

There is no law greater than our Constitution and, despite what must be the left's best efforts, and what must piss it off the most, is the fact that the Bush administration, democrats and Republicans in the Congress - acting on behalf of us, the People - opted to eliminate a potential threat at a time when threats were very real, all within the bounds of the law.

Screw the UN.

Handgunner

You should never expect the UN or the world community to help us enforce any international law.

bush lied to congress about Iraq WMD.

Uh Ken Iraq was hardly defenseless unless you mean the Kurdish women and children who Saddam gassed to death. Man are you deluded.

riley they were safely contained and posed no threat to any other nation. The rapid collapse of their military in not one but two wars proves that.

Iran, Kuwait and the Kurdish experience both proved otherwise.

Didn't say he wasn't ruthless and I feel great sadness for the Kurds. When exactly did he attack Iran or Kuwait after the first Gulf war? That's the meaning of "contained."

I'm glad Boehner and McCain are eager to take credit. They and all the others like them deserve all the credit for 4,734 dead soldiers and countless innocent civilian lives. http://icasualties.org/iraq/index.aspx If only I had any hope that the knowledge would haunt them for the rest of their lives.

And a special reward to Joe Lieberman, who kept alive the illusion of bipartisan agreement to this monstrosity long after the smoke of fear had cleared and most had regained their senses.

I'll tell you these two have a very strange vision of success. More than 4,000 American dead, many hideously wounded. The same has happened to many of our "allies". Countless thousands of Iraqis are dead and maimed. If that's success, I can happily live the rest of my life without the Boehner and McCain version of failure...

I guess then by your understanding, we also did not have any sucess in WWII being that over 416,000 us troops died and millions of civilians world wide. I would not call WWII a failure for America. The sucess or failure of the US in Iraq will be measured over the next 20 years. Not by the number of American miliatry men and womem who were killed and wounded there. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to see any of our soldiers killed in war, but it will happen and we should be grateful for the sacrifce those soldiers gave us in order to create what they believed will be a better world for everyone, especially Americans!

Iraq-- 1% of WW2 dead. Puts it in perspective. Why go? 6000 verified cease fire violations by Saddam according to the UN.

STLMike:

You guess wrong. Don't guess you know how I think or how I understand things.

To compare WWII with Iraq is to compare a grapefruit to a piano. We entered WWII wit a formal declaration of war as required by the Constitution. Iraq has no such legal sanction. Our incursion into and occupation of Iraq is pure Imperialism. Under even a child's examination, any justification(s) for our presence in Iraq crumbles.

The expenditure of one single life in such adventurism is indefensible, moreso given the fact that the insanity and needless destruction was conducted by chicken hawks.

Please don't ask me to be grateful for the sacrifice of those soldiers. I feel sorrow for their families and their loved ones. That sorrow is compounded by my firm belief that they died in vain, pursuing an unattainable victory.

Don't ask me to buy into a jingoistic view of the world. Don't ask me to believe America knows what is best for the world, particularly when our "leaders" are wanton liars and our legislators are corrupt beyond words.

Search as you will for as long as you will. You will find no success. You will find a failure of leadership and a failure of national will. To cast this in military terms, we have been defeated, for we have lost the moral high ground.

If you are so jaded about the quality of this country's leadership Walker, then run for office dont armchair quarterback this thing to death. Im sure the same skeptics existed during WWII, as proven by Chamberlain's grovelling during Hitler's acquisition of Czechoslovakia and Poland. We've heard it all before from leaders who refuse to make tough decisions again and again "theres no pretext for war!" "let's let diplomacy do the work!" All fairly noble claims but the trigger point is reached at some point and people have to die. Its never a good day out when that happens but that call has to be reached and then people have to come out of the woodwork to lambaste it when they would never be in that tough position.

Im sorry but people like you who sit and find it so easy to be critical of others mistakes without attempting to try and fix the problem even on a micro level somehow, offer solutions or refuse to add fuel to the critical fire get the raspberry award. There is no moral high ground when you are in the trenches actually receiving indirect fire, you are thoroughly reduced to primal instincts and pinned by the fog of war. It is the same thing when faced with a decision that will ultimately affect the lives of others, you will be criticized until your dying day and then probably long after for making that decision by others who comfortably sit in the their homes and enjoy the freedom provided by rough men who actually have to kill, order others to kill or push a button to do it. Easy for others to judge the motivations behind this.

America will face greater challenges and men will be forced to make greater sacrifices. Its good that we will have no lack of critics inside nor out on future decisions to mitigate these.

Sorry riley but you're just wrong. Your position maintains that as citizens it's our job to just accept the presumably wise decisions of our betters. That's not the American way. If we accept your premise that we shouldn't look at the quality of decision making that led to placing our soldiers in harms way we're doomed to make the same mistakes over and over, bankrupting our country and losing the moral high ground that we've always maintained. It was a bad decision and our civilian leaders sacrificed lives for no good reason. Then they wasted years, huge amounts of money, and the opportunity to rapidly gain the trust of the Iraqi people by forcing the military to go in with far too little in the way of resources. In the process we took our eyes off the ball in Afghanistan and made THAT operation 100 times more difficult.

The Bush Administration did it wrong from A to Z. It's that simple.

Well, I was willing to accept constructive criticism until I read the last several lines of your post. I have to stop you in your tracks.

War is a fluid environment and any soldier knows that you can throw out your first, second, third and quite often your forth plan when it all touches off. The military had to adapt and grow, try new methods and rewrite a counter-insurgency manual. The US had to cycle through several generals before finding a TTP that worked, its the way it works.

And I hate to break it to you but war is ALWAYS a waste of money and trust is gained and lost over time. I believe we accomplished some of that with a good percentage of the Shia population this time around. Lessons learned. After Action Reviews...they work and thats why theyre implemented so the military and its leadership can learn over time. The American way is learning and adapting. It doesnt always happen but it does happen if people like you would give it a chance.

Saying an administration did something wrong from A to Z just shows your bias, even I wouldnt say that about Obama's administration and I have my doubts. You made up your mind before the guy ever stepped into the Oval Office and wouldn't change your mind even if he saved your life.

It doesn't matter what happened during the war. After the inner circle of the Bush Administration decided to go everything thereafter was wrong.

There are no winners in war. When it's over we declare the side which lost the least to be the winner and move on.

Gee, John. Here's a quote from your post.

Your position maintains that as citizens it's our job to just accept the presumably wise decisions of our betters. That's not the American way. If we accept your premise that we shouldn't look at the quality of decision making....

Is that your same attitude when people call Obama's decisions into question? Or do you call them names (like racists, perhaps), label them as "idealess Conservatives" and declare them to be "despicable"?

I can quote your other posts for the answer to that, if you want.....

Nope. I don't label something as racist until racism is apparent. And I have no problem calling people despicable when they do despicable things as described here;

http://hubpages.com/hub/Barack-Obama--Top-Ten-Myths

here http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2009/06/08/obama_myths

here http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0309/20118.html

and here http://www.barackopedia.org/page/Barack+Obama+Myths

Liars, cheats, and crooks deserve to be called by those names. For that I won't apologize. Criticism is the right of all Americans. Defining lies as "spin" is something else entirely.

Amen . . . thanks to all the real American patriots who defend us anywhere in the world whenever they are called.

If only the civilian population could capture a bit more of their selfless spirit.

June, Fl

Neither!

Our Soldiers & Their families are more important but the Media nor do the Politicians seem to care.

That is exacly right; June. As the mother of a son in the military and another who served in Desert Storm, after going through so much anguish I think we should ackonwlegdge the deeds of our sons, daughters, cousins, neighbors and everyone who served our country to protect US.

Forget about the WAR MONGER AND LIAR-IN-CHIEF, GW Bush who deserves no credit.

President Obama should acknowledge that will US not continue the military industrial complex any more.

Bush also said that Iraq was a imminant threat . I knew that he was lying knowing saddam did not have a navy ..all he had was a cannon aimed at Iran or Turkey that was stationary. Tough to see sons a daughters volunteer for a war that bush was hell bent on ...God Bless the injured and give the soldiers peace of mind and bless those all who served and the ones who didn't make it home..My Dad served in WW II and was with 101st caught behind lines in the argonne forest . After burying my oldest brother his oldest son who we lost in vietnam he turned and looked at me and said .."War is never the answer." I lost my son in Iraq three years ago. My Dads words echo in my mind till this day

@kate you are right on with this.

The other thing that has been true since the moment we invaded is that when we leave it is only a matter of time before another dictator takes control. This will not be the current President's fault (Obama or otherwise). It will also be GW Bush's legacy, just as much as the needless death, maiming, and destruction has been since the invasion.

Part of GW Bush's legacy is also give Osama Bin Laden more success than he ever dreamed of. Thousands of dedicated soldiers deaths, tens of thousands wounded and who will suffer for life, over a trillion dollars wasted and the US National debt suffering the consequences. Tens of thousands of Muslims killed at the hand of America which is being used to promote his agenda. Open hatred of Muslims being expressed by our politicians and the hysteria the right wing media has created to stir that up.

Gen. Odierno "hopes" that the Iraqis can form a democratic government and admits that the US knew very little about Iraq when it rushed in.

Why is we have so many runaway generals?

Sen. McCain has very little credibility any more, but he did once say that the military should only go in when the mission was well-defined, with specific objectives.

Sen. McCain's machismo is predominately with specific objectives to enhance the military industrial compound.

Mc Cain is always spinning on his axis. John McCain was lambasted for supporting the Air Force's decision to award a $40 billion contract for refueling tankers to Northrop Grumman and its European partner. Democrats, labor unions and others blamed the senator for a deal they say could move tens of thousands of jobs abroad. That's not wanting to keeps jobs here nor is it fiscally conservative.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/05/30/ST2008053003281.html?sid=ST2008053003281

Dick Cheney will soon come out of undisclosed location and endorse the Give Bush Credit talking point since he manipulated his favorite puppet, Georgie boy, I'll bet. We know his daughter Liz will.

Americans want jobs more than foreign policy. So this Give Bush Credit is really an oxymoronic subject. Bush got a lot of credit from China!!

I beg to disagree with McCain and Boehner. The war in Iraq is not ending successfully. It was an utter disaster before the surge and there is still too much violence in that country as a direct result of our invasion and occupation to ever use the words success.

My heart breaks for all the innocent young lives that have been lost or destroyed serving our country in a needless and useless war. The only thing we have to show for all this heartache and squandered treasure is a dead Saddam Hussein!

Wrong--- 6000 UN counted cease fire violations. UN 1991 cease-fire expressly allowed the US or any country to go in again with even 1 cease fire violation.

After 911, and 6000 violations, and the UN stating that Saddam used poison gas that murdered over 100,000 people, we HAD to go in to protect ourselves.

why? - Iraq had nothing to do with 911...

as for the gassing of a 100,000 people - didn't that take place in 1988? That would have been before we were there the first time - shouldn't we have held him accountable then?

Come on, b dune, stop with the facts, already. The facts just do not matter to the right wingers. Why? Because they know they were wrong, they know they are guilty of cheering for people committing war crimes (the Bush administration) and they are trying to cleanse their souls of the guilt this knowledge brings.

Thank you for posting this. It is a voice of reason at a time of mass hysteria fueled by propaganda.

Sound familiar America? 71% of us are being sucked into similar propaganda and political BS right now. Wake up!

Mission Accomplished !

Nash, you forget to Add that, IRAN Is Now NUCULUR !

Another Mission Accomplished !

You Betcha!

Sad but true Rick, sad but true.

The surge may have helped, but as of today, the Armed forces are engaged in Iraq and so the end game has yet to be played. More than the surge, the assimilation of Sunnis into the Iraqi police and armed forces, was the main reason violence decreased. If any segment becomes or feels minimized or alienated, then a civil war is possible. While there is continued argument over the merits of the war, the critical question is how do we leave Iraq, what happens when we leave and will we be there forty years from now.

Enough Said. You can not turn back the clock and we need to deal with the current reailty.

Reminds me how much I miss Teddy Kennedy and the wisdom he brought to the Senate. He had the courage of his conviction to oppose this war when his fellow legislators were falling in line like sheep.

President Obama should not thank Bush for a damn thing.

We would not have needed a surge without the war!!!

Oh! John McCain you have an awful lot, to be at the least embarassed by, but mostly to be ashamed, for what you let loose on this country and possibly the world.

What a legacy to be proud of, we can be sure there are other 'sarahs' to come, for the GOP love and endorse this type of rabblerouser.

Personally not a fan of Gov Palin's however the contract you reference is quite mild in comparison to some I have seen when working with political or celebrity speakers.

It is pretty much a standard contract and not even the price is that high in comparison to some. Not only that but mot require per diem food expenses included along with phone calls, etc. Some I have seen even require reimbursement for airfare if they for some other reason arrive under their own steam.

Some even reserve the right to approve who may be sponsoring an event along with tickets for any who may be travelling with them not at their expense.

June, FL

Not One Media Report On This?

I saw that @Think Progress this morning and posted it on "First Thoughts". How is it this witch has the nerve to insinuate the media is not questioning who President Obama is; just because she and bat sh!t crazy; actually they both are, not satified in the way they think the media should question and portray the President?

http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/hannity/index.html#/v/4325173/vast-right-wing-conspiracy-revived/?playlist_id=86924

We really do need to point out and discuss how hypocritical she and Glenn Beck, both multi millionaires are.

That contract also makes numerous demands to limit the public's and the media's access to Palin:

Sarah should answer these questions...

Why can't she answer questions to the media by making herself available and why does she lie so much?

Why, oh why, does Sista Sarah think people can believe *anything* she says?

Another issue that should be know is why Glenn Beck changed the purpose of the rally from a"demonstration to honor veterans" to simply a"restoring honor rally."If you guessed because Beck is a fraud too, you're Riiiiiiiiiiight!!

http://www.newscorpse.com/ncWP/?p=2472

in post 14, I only wish we could possibly gat a copy of the tree shaking Jessie Jackson, man that would be a hoot! Or how about Al Gory? no need to eh? doesent serve you purpose does it

My thoughts exactly.

It seems to me the best way to survive an automobile accident is not to get in one in the first place.

why dont you just take the bus?....govt. employees would never let you get in an accident and get hurt/ or do they kill us every day.....1 tax after another.

They are so smart......Got a BS in ignorance or PHD

Geez, just shut up dude

Joe,

I'd tell you my comment was a "metaphor" but I don't think you know what that word means.

JoAnn

Couldn't agree with you more!!!!!

Sorry dude, no free passes today, The nation knows exactly why this nation is falling off the cliff Dem regulation and taxes on all........think for yourself once in your life oooh, glad i got to fix this comment before it posted, I just think we need to give community orginizers the key to the treasury (you know, your tax money and mine) and let them spend it as they see fit.....exclusive UNION Contracts, more monet to fix public housing (would be nice if the free loaders would take care of the gift of those of us working getting the message yet?

Get a clue, Joe - but I know that's asking too much! The nation is falling off a cliff? Today's taxes are Bush's republican taxes, not Obama's. Exclusive UNION contracts? You mean the 12% of workers who are still in unions? Down from 40% in the eighties? Or are you talking about the billions in no-bid contracts that went to Bush/Cheney friends and contributors?

You just don't deal with the truth very well, do you?

AnaBanana

That is to funny.....slipping on his tanning gel!!!!!

Voted!!!

speaking of tanning gel, amazing the tanning salons that are getting taxed extra, only Fair Skinned people would use.....just a thought.

JFK2112

So i guess to you the 700 billion and 4400 lives were worth it. other peoples money and others peoples lives. only a coward would say that.

i said in a realy post, that i hope the republican do get back, then they can clean up there own mess from 01-08. let the fools clean up their mess.

Jeff,

I guess we shouldn't have done anything after 9/11. In case you didn't know, they attacked us, do not like us, want to kill us. I salute all of those who served and still serve this great nation of ours and they gave the ultimate sacrifice. By the way, I served for 20 years and was in the Pentagon when it was attacked...

Iraq did not attack us, that is a flat out lie, If that is the quality of truth from a man of 20 years service and pentagon duty then it is sad statement for our armed forces.

JFK2112

I guess we shouldn't have done anything after 9/11. In case you didn't know, they attacked us

we did we went after the taliban, they attacked us not iraq.

The people who attached us were not in iraq, but Afgan. if the people who attacked us were in iraq they why did we not go there first. sorry, but the war in iraq was a vindidta between iraq sadaham and bush. he wages a personal war against him and used american boys to carry it out. we all know the truth now. former SS of state Powel Quit because he saw where that was going.

They weren't even Afghan, mostly Saudi, allegedly. JFK2112 was in the Pentagon when it was struck by the cruise missle our own military shot into it. So he of course would know the identities of the attackers. The same way a man shot in the head by a sniper from a mile away is aware that he has been sniped. All he knows is his world has gone black and silent.

You are correct, they were in 3 seperate airplanes destined for NYC and DC. Rather than read up on all the intelligence that was gathered over a 10 year period, I'll just read and watch MSNBC for all my news. There were so many ties between Saddam and Al Queda it would make your head spin.

Hey Forest, your name is befitting...never said Iraq attacked us. I said "they attacked us" (Al Queda). Shame on you for your statement on our Armed Forces.

@JFK

The so called intelligence that showed links between Saddam and Al Queda have been disproven. Much of it was fabricated.

The facts are clear to most of America now, unfortunately they were hidden behind propaganda and rhetoric when Bush invaded. They knew the truth but pushed forward with their oil based agenda in spite of it. In doing so, the Bush administration play right into Bin Laden's hands.

1) Iraq did not have a role in the attacks of 9/11

2) Saddam and Al Queda were not allies

3) Saddam/Iraq did not attempt to buy Yellow Cake as was alleged

4) There was no verifiable evidence of WMD

JFK2112

You are correct, they were in 3 seperate airplanes destined for NYC and DC. Rather than read up on all the intelligence that was gathered over a 10 year period, I'll just read and watch MSNBC for all my news. There were so many ties between Saddam and Al Queda it would make your head spin.

Again your wrong! There were four seperate airplanes, two hit the World Trade Center, one hit the Pentagon and the last hit the ground in Shanksville PA because of the heroic passengers!

Please, other than Dick Chaney saying there was a connection between Saddam and Al Queda, there is no prove whats so ever.

You are telling NeoCon lies!!!

Awsome JFK, more of us less of them

1 vote

PC Atlanta

Scary how a man charged with being our Commander in Chief doesn't have even a little experience in the field - not even voting for militarily charged issues.

what war was bush in. he was awol in the national guard and chicken out of vietman, him and chenny, his daddy was in WW2 and the comander in chief for the first gulf war. that went just fine, because he knew the human cost of going all the way to bagdad, something he failed to teach his son, but his son was too busy cheating people in bad business deals to pay close attention to why his own dad stopped 50 miles from bagdad.

I agree this was an unfortunate situation caused by a catastrophic tragedy (a tragedy whose memory is being preserved by building a mosque constructed on-site by two-faced terrorist supporters- we have sympathy for Iraqi's and Muslims but not for the Americans killed here at home), but to sit here and judge actions from 8 years ago in hindsight seems a bit ostentatious and a bit condescending.

You are sadly mistaken, PC.

I thought everybody knew by now...there was no link between Saddam Hussein and the hijackers who flew planes into the World Trade Center.

Those people in congress were lied to.

YAWN!

I'm sorry Ana, do facts bore you? Too bad, many of us choose to make our decisions based on them.

John B, Des Moines, IA
I'm sorry Ana, do facts bore you? Too bad, many of us choose to make our decisions based on them.

No.....Just you.

BFD

Who wouldn't want the cash cow to stick around.

Iraq is not the USA. The Iraqis have to solve their own problems with their own money and their own soldiers.

We have more than enough problems here. We do not have enough money to solve our own problems.

see how smart rick below is......only the unions want the govt to stick around.....the cash cow. (except there is no deals for you and me...the taxpayer) what a bunch of fools on the vine

It would be nice if just one Republican would say we got the country into this war on a lie and then mishandled it once we were there and we're sorry to the thousands of people who were killed or wounded for our folly.

Steeler fan, think of the jobs saved! oh, lives saved in your world

Cant count that, but it sure sounds good, you guys use that one alot

Pat, please tabulate the numbers of how many Shiites and Kurds died under Saddam's rule and Im sure the numbers that look so staggering to you from the war will pale in comparison. One of the quotes that I found interesting was one from a man who was released from Abu Ghraib prison and asked what he thought of the photos taken of Iraqis feigning torture by the Americans. He replied that Saddam had not only tortured those when the prison much worse when it was in Baath party control but often killed members of his family including women and children to drive home his message.

Things are better now than when hundreds of thousands were dying per year under Saddam's rule. Everyone knows to make an omlete you have to break a few eggs

Is our evil really justified by the fact that someone else was evil? That's a false equivalence and it makes us no better than the former rulers of Iraq. Who, it's important to note, we installed and counted as our friends once upon a time.

Yet there is no formal government in place. The Taliban and al Qaeda still walk the streets. Iraq is on the verge of civil war. Iran has more influence in the region than they have had in 30 years. We will continue to spend billions for years to come.

Great Job !!

We killed thousands and thousands of Iraqis for no good reason, they will hate us for the next hundred years we brought them nothing but misery and chaos. Hey I bet they love us as much as Vietnam, and Korea loves us I just hope they don't get jealous that we are giving all our goodies to Afganistan now, it might turn out to be a regular love triangle. You only bomb the ones you love, they know that and thats why they love us back.

The generational memory of the Arab world is staggering. At every turn, Middle Eastern media takes the opportunity to paint the US and Europe as imperalists, conquerors and Crusaders interested in forming puppet states.

To declare that in a century all will be forgotten and forgiven - to declare that peace will be had - is the height of folly.

Right, it's not going to happen over night. But I'm confident in the long run, this will be a positive. With the world so integrated now, the Middle East has no option but to join the fray. The longer they reject the ideals of the West, the longer they will remain subjegated to the backwaters. Capitalism has indeed broken down the "Chinese walls".

If the repugs keep constantly calling all Muslims every filthy name in the book, The Muslims and Arabs will quickly make the USA their best friend and forget the Iraq war catastrophe.

We got our butts kicked and it isn't over yet. Osama Bin Laden must be laughing at the way he sucked President Cheney and his nitwit underling into a disastrous protracted war that has handed Irag to Iran.