[A Quiet Boom]

Please don't misunderstand what I meant about WMD, i am not trying to justifiy the war after the fact. I was trying to point out hypocrisy, please tell me why we went into Kosovo again?

Now let's pretend you are the President of the US, your responsiblity is to protect the American people. The attacks of 9/11 have occured and the whole country is afraid of another attack. You then receive intelligence from a sleu of intelligence agencies not just from the US but also from around the world that Saddam has stockpiles of WMD and is working on nuclear technology. There is proof that he has used WMD in the past, he has stated his hatred for the US and he pays suicide bombers to attack Israel. What would your decision be? Would you do nothing and hope Saddam doesn't put some of that stockpile into the hands of terrorists and fund an attack on a major US city or cities? Before the war nearly everyone agreed that Saddam had WMD, in fact most of the world's leaders and their intelligence networks believed he had them. Saddam further added to the myth by blocking the inspectors, any logical person at the time would conclude that he must have something to hide. Russia, Germany and France had nothing to worry about since they basically paid Saddam off, kind of like paying the mafia for protection. We all know that hindsight is 20/20 and had we known now what we didn't know then we might not have attacked Iraq, or maybe we would have attacked for humanitarian reasons. The fact is you have to go with the evidence you have before you and that is exactly what Bush did. The problem the liberals have is they forget GW's other reasons for going to Iraq, freeing a country and setting up a democracy in the ME was and is a grandiose idea and truly forward looking and when liberty fully takes hold I'll bet it has a huge influence on the populations of the other countries in the region.

These same liberals talk about the dangers of Iran and N. Korea, but who was it that pointed out this axis of evil? Then they insinuate that we should get tougher with these countries, haven't they noticed that we are already trying their paln of diplomacy with little success? Getting tougher will mean invading those countries yet when and if we must do that the libs will say we rushed to war. I believe Bush knew going in that Iraq might cost him a second term but he thought it was the right thing to do and had to be done, now that is the sign of a strong leader. Based on the polls before Iraq Bush was a shoe in for a second term and now that he has made the tough decision and taken the political fallout not one liberal will even give the guy credit for being strong in a time of crisis. Kerry and Edwards supported the war when it was a popular idea and now they don't, they don't have the credibiltiy or principals to run this country. And lest you think I'm merely being partisan, you should know that I supported Clinton's action in Kosovo as well as his missle strikes against Saddam's suspected WMD sites, those were the right things to do. And if Clinton had intelligence that Saddam might try to use WMD against the US in a terrorist strike I'd of supported an invasion then as I do now. It seems to me we should be more concerned with what might have happened to those weapons we didn't find rather than call Bush a liar for laying out the evidence he had at the time.