BondGuy-where are you getting all this information stating that reconstruction has ground to a halt?  Not trying to argue this point with you, just that I haven’t seen coverage suggesting as such.

Tenant(then cia director) had to threaten to go public with a denial to stop Cheney from saying in a speech that we had a direct intelligence link to WMDs.

Tenant, the "slam dunk" (to prove Saddam had WMDs) guy?

I think you're not giving people enough credit for being able to think for themselves.

The irony of this coming from you...

OK, where does this come from? First there is the fact that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowicz are on the record during the 90's that we should take out Saddam.

Please, not the PFAC fable....

Lastly, Iraq was on the Bush agenda  before 9/11/ Bush had made it part of his presidency to dipose Saddam. How and when were up in the air, but it was in the wind, so to speak.

The left's position is not a stretch. It looks like he made it up to have an excuse to take Saddam out.

I guess Bush is so clever that he got Clinton, as far back as 1998 to talk about the Saddam/WMD links and the danger it posed...

 Even though the intell told them there were no WMDs, they all believed that there were.

I suggest you re-read those Intel reports if you think they said there were no WMDs. Remember 'ol "slam dunk"?

All but one important person, who remained neutral, Powell. No one listened to him.

You must have missed Powell's speech before the UN about Saddam and WMD, he was anything but neutral.

 So there is a reason the left hangs Bush on this issue.

Yep, and it involves endless, baseless conspiracy mongering...

[quote=mikebutler222]

Tenant(then cia director) had to threaten to go public with a denial to stop Cheney from saying in a speech that we had a direct intelligence link to WMDs.

Tenant, the "slam dunk" (to prove Saddam had WMDs) guy?

I think you're not giving people enough credit for being able to think for themselves.

The irony of this coming from you...

OK, where does this come from? First there is the fact that Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowicz are on the record during the 90's that we should take out Saddam.

Please, not the PFAC fable....

Lastly, Iraq was on the Bush agenda  before 9/11/ Bush had made it part of his presidency to dipose Saddam. How and when were up in the air, but it was in the wind, so to speak.

The left's position is not a stretch. It looks like he made it up to have an excuse to take Saddam out.

I guess Bush is so clever that he got Clinton, as far back as 1998 to talk about the Saddam/WMD links and the danger it posed...

 Even though the intell told them there were no WMDs, they all believed that there were.

I suggest you re-read those Intel reports if you think they said there were no WMDs. Remember 'ol "slam dunk"?

All but one important person, who remained neutral, Powell. No one listened to him.

You must have missed Powell's speech before the UN about Saddam and WMD, he was anything but neutral.

 So there is a reason the left hangs Bush on this issue.

Yep, and it involves endless, baseless conspiracy mongering...

[/quote]

Mike, You're right.

back to work