“#109 – “It was incumbent upon the President to provide any proof.” Comment by SD
*******Yes it was. Just like it was incumbent on President Clinton (who along with Hillary, John Kerry, Ted the Swimmer, et al) believed there were WMD’s which required a regime chande in 1998. (Pssst….I believe Bush, Clinton etc. were relying on the same info…..)

The major difference being that Pres. Clinton didn’t get us into a war without any planning or any end in sight. (Psst! I believe that’s called Good Leadership…) Like Pres. G. H.W. Bush, Pres. Clinton probably thought that stability and people not being killed on a daily basis was a good thing. You can say they had the same intelligence (Forgive me, I’m not taking your word for it), but the bottom line is what was done with that intelligence. Pres. G.W. Bush has demonstrated an incredible knack for being incompetent and blaming others for it.

Back On Topic: Perle and his ilk (Santoram) always say they’ve “Seen” proof of Iraq’s prior links to terrorist groups but never show it.

Was Iraq a Dictatorship? Absolutely.
Did he have formal ties at a Gov’t level with Terrorist Groups? I tend to doubt it, else the evidence would have showed up by now, don’t you think?

BTW: Love the attempt to link Pres. Clinton to the Iraq War. You just can’t admit this War is all on Pres. G.W. Bush, can you?

Perle is acting as a self-appointed Israeli agent provocateur. In his fantasy world, he is the Israeli super-spy, who will single-handedly make the U.S. do Israel’s bidding. In fact, the Israelis told Perle to go *()&(* himself when he presented them with plans to attack Iraq. But for Perle to be perceived in the U.S. as this spymeister supreme that he’s fantasized himself to be, HE CANNOT ADMIT ERROR.

Perle, just like Wolfowitz, Feith, Rumsfeld, and soon Cheney, have become completely irrelevant. Let them die in peace.

Trust me.

I wonder what rank the links between Saddam and the Reagan/Bush I/Bush II would have been?

For that matter, what rank should be assigned to the links between Bin Laden and Reagan/Bush I/Bush II?

Just my opinion, but I believe the NeoCon’s in our government had stronger ties to Hussein and Bin Laden than those two had with each other.

these were some of the guys saddam gassed (with our gas):

http://www.cfr.org/publication/9241/
“The United States—one of Turkey’s NATO allies—lists the PKK as a foreign terrorist organization. “

If this was the Middle Ages we could get creative on their asses and hold them fully accountable…but alas it’s not….we’ll have to settle to public humiliation and ridicule. If you ever see this dirtbag let him know what we think of him…by laughing in his face.

Palachio…

http://www.hyperrealpolitik.blogspot.com

A newly elected Democrat Congressman also said that Saddam had links to al Qaeda. From the New Yorker, hardly a neocon publication or neocon elected official.

http://www.regimeofterror.com

lets face it… richard, dick, rummy, and whitey hermaphrodite live in a world where anything they beleive must be proven wrong before they cease to beleive it. since its nearly impossible to prove a negative…well… lets face it.. these peoples beleifs dont change much. in fact i think its safe to say that no matter how bad iraq gets, most of them will go to their graves thinking the holocaust thats going on in iraq (and that will probably spread) it better than having meanie weenie saddam in power. mark my words, it wont be long before the majority of iraqis think theyd be better off under saddam. i wish theyd take a poll now and see if im already right.

these people live in a a world where Iraq would be a new garden of Eden were it not for people like Cindy Sheehan and Murtha. they are hopelesslessy deluded that thier beleifs are correct, no matter how hard reality hits them in the face.

I am tired of cleaning up shit and have learned to ignore it to a certain extent.

Since we’re not into incest or gay marriage I don’t think your scenario would work

Who said anything about gay marriage? Again, your response to being smacked is to change the subject, which is that a sustained high level of incest in your family is one possible explanation for your impaired mental faculties.

Indeed, you could do the world a favor by embracing gay marriage, to avoid further pollution of the gene pool.

It’s so fun dueling with an armless opponent.

“Neither Afghanistan or Iraq were unprovoked – I guess you skipped over the ‘Cease-Fire” is not a “cessation of hostilities” lesson…”

Please indicate where I suggested that Afghanistan was unprovoked. The subject post (#160) was about WMDs in Iraq. I find it hard to believe someone with your inability to pay attention to detail or follow logical reasoning could be a lawyer.

As for Iraq, Saddam was quite well contained without committing our troops to a multi-year debacle with nothing to show for it but death, terrorist recuiting films, and another Islamic state in the making. So no, you are quite wrong to conclude that the invasion and occupation of Iraq was an appropriate provoked response.

To think that so many have suffered (and will suffer) thanks to short-circuit thinking like yours. Sad, really.

Funny, the law-enforcement approach worked far better than invading sovereign countries for capturing, trying, convicting and sentencing the guilty parties.

Bush couldn’t even come up with enough evidence against Bin Laden to warrant extradition, which the Taliban offered. Instead, Bush ordered invasions which slaughtered hundreds of thousands of innocent children, women, and men. Right now, Bush is the greatest terrorist in the world. Kinda makes you proud, doesn’t it, MA?

How many suspects in Guantanamo have been tried, convicted and sentenced? None? How much have we spent going after the terrorists in a non-law enforcement manner? Billions? Trillions? You have to be insane to think Bush’s War was the better approach.

But then, it takes a certain amount of delusional thinking to pass one’s self off as an attorney.