On Mon, 22 Mar 2004 16:27:52 +0000, NOYB wrote:


"thunder" wrote in message
news
Fact: The number of people who believe this war was about WMD or
terrorism, is rapidly dwindling, including many people *inside* this
administration.


That's a half-fact. WMD's was just an issue, as Wolfowitz put it, "that
everyone could agree upon". Everybody on both sides of the aisle in
Congress, who had access to the same pre-war intelligence as Bush, reached
the same conclusion about the existence of the WMD's. Personally, I'm
convinced that the bulk of them went to Syria or were destroyed in the
6-12 months leading up to the war.

You are right, it is a half fact. It wasn't WMD or terrorism, it was the
threat that they posed to the US, as pointed out in GWB's Cincinnati
speech, no WMD, no terrorism, no threat.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0021007-8.html

However, any suggestion that those who believe in an Iraq/al Qaeda
connection are now losing faith in the substantivity of that
relationship is false. In fact, I think that the terrorist attacks in
Iraq over the last year demonstrate that the terrorists had a much
stronger pre-war foothold in the country than anyone could ever have
imagined.

Flawed logic. We opened that box. Pre-war there were no terrorist
attacks in Iraq. I would also suggest calling all the attacks in Iraq
"terrorist" isn't accurate. While some attacks are, perhaps even al
Qaeda, others are Bathist remnants, religious sects, and ethnic squabbles.