"JohnH" wrote in message
...

On Fri, 05 Dec 2008 06:33:10 -0500, Boater wrote:

Usually, but not always, sending our young people to fight because of
the mistakes of their elders, is wrong. It was the right thing to do in
the case of Bush I, because he knew what the hell he was doing, and did
it mostly right. It was wrong in the case of Bush II for so many reasons
there isn't enough bandwidth to list them all.



Bush acted on the intel he got from our sources and those of other
interested countries. His mistake was in waiting six months to act.



I don't consider it a mistake. It was an obligation, in an attempt to
prevent an invasion and war. All Saddam had to do initially was to honor
the UN defined resolutions agreed to at the end of Gulf War l.
He had a final, 11th hour chance to avoid war by responding to an ultimatum
for him and his goofy sons to beat feet. Bottom line is (and this has been
substantiated by some of Saddam's surviving staff members) that Saddam
thought Bush was bluffing and didn't have the balls (or support) to invade.
Obviously, he was proven wrong.

It really gets my ass sometimes that some people ignore the six months or
more of trying to work within the UN, the warnings, the ultimatums, the UN
votes supporting the enforcement of previous resolutions, all resulting in
Saddam giving the world the finger.

Bush had two choices. Either do what he said he would do or say, "Oooops,
sorry, just kidding, lets talk".

Eisboch