"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:43:10 -0000, wrote:

I wonder if we will ever learn the real reason for this war. It sure as
hell wasn't WMD.

We took down Saddam so Israel wouldn't. In that regard Hillary was
behind it 100% along with Lieberman and McCain.
The only other option was to let Israel do it on their own ... very
unlikely or to back them and that would be worse than the mess we have
now.
The US has gone far out of their way to avoid using the "I" word. That
is why they came up with the Kurds, WMD and the idea of democracy for
Iraq.


Cynic that I am, I think it was because Bush had a hard-on for Iraq before
he took office, and directed his staff to cook the intel so he could
justify his attack to the American people. That and the fact that
he had dead-ended in the hunt for bin Laden in Afghanistan.



Why even spend time in the kitchen? They don't need to cook the intelligence
when it's just as easy to ignore it.

Remember the metal tubes that were supposed to be perfect for use in a
nuclear facility? Our own scientists (Oak Ridge Laboratory) examined samples
and said "Great for artillery barrels, useless for nuclear facilities". The
IAEA looked at them and came to the same conclusion. But, Bush still used
them in his list of excuses. Remember?

JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:43:10 -0000, wrote:

I wonder if we will ever learn the real reason for this war. It sure as
hell wasn't WMD.
We took down Saddam so Israel wouldn't. In that regard Hillary was
behind it 100% along with Lieberman and McCain.
The only other option was to let Israel do it on their own ... very
unlikely or to back them and that would be worse than the mess we have
now.
The US has gone far out of their way to avoid using the "I" word. That
is why they came up with the Kurds, WMD and the idea of democracy for
Iraq.

Cynic that I am, I think it was because Bush had a hard-on for Iraq before
he took office, and directed his staff to cook the intel so he could
justify his attack to the American people. That and the fact that
he had dead-ended in the hunt for bin Laden in Afghanistan.



Why even spend time in the kitchen? They don't need to cook the intelligence
when it's just as easy to ignore it.

Remember the metal tubes that were supposed to be perfect for use in a
nuclear facility? Our own scientists (Oak Ridge Laboratory) examined samples
and said "Great for artillery barrels, useless for nuclear facilities". The
IAEA looked at them and came to the same conclusion. But, Bush still used
them in his list of excuses. Remember?




I'm not ashamed to admit this, but I determined that Bush was a p.o.s.
while he was still governor of Texas.

On Jan 30, 2:07 pm, HK wrote:
JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
wrote:
On Wed, 30 Jan 2008 17:43:10 -0000, wrote:

I wonder if we will ever learn the real reason for this war. It sure as
hell wasn't WMD.
We took down Saddam so Israel wouldn't. In that regard Hillary was
behind it 100% along with Lieberman and McCain.
The only other option was to let Israel do it on their own ... very
unlikely or to back them and that would be worse than the mess we have
now.
The US has gone far out of their way to avoid using the "I" word. That
is why they came up with the Kurds, WMD and the idea of democracy for
Iraq.

Cynic that I am, I think it was because Bush had a hard-on for Iraq before
he took office, and directed his staff to cook the intel so he could
justify his attack to the American people. That and the fact that
he had dead-ended in the hunt for bin Laden in Afghanistan.

Why even spend time in the kitchen? They don't need to cook the intelligence
when it's just as easy to ignore it.

Remember the metal tubes that were supposed to be perfect for use in a
nuclear facility? Our own scientists (Oak Ridge Laboratory) examined samples
and said "Great for artillery barrels, useless for nuclear facilities". The
IAEA looked at them and came to the same conclusion. But, Bush still used
them in his list of excuses. Remember?

I'm not ashamed to admit this, but I determined that Bush was a p.o.s.
while he was still governor of Texas.

Not a surprise, your intolerant hatred for anyone with a R in front of
their name is not unexpected. We know that you are not even capable of
seeing things any other way.. That's why most of us just skip though
your posts after the first insult/lie/line..... It's not that we
don't understand what you write, it's just that the same old stuff
gets too boring to read through..

wrote:
On Jan 30, 2:07 pm, HK wrote:

I'm not ashamed to admit this, but I determined that Bush was a p.o.s.
while he was still governor of Texas.

Not a surprise, your intolerant hatred for anyone with a R in front of
their name is not unexpected. We know that you are not even capable of
seeing things any other way.. That's why most of us just skip though
your posts after the first insult/lie/line..... It's not that we
don't understand what you write, it's just that the same old stuff
gets too boring to read through..


My determination about Bush had nothing to do with his "R."

It was based upon two incidents:

1. When he declared "Jesus Day" in Texas, an act totally inappropriate
for the chief secular official of a state, and,

2. When he appeared on television, gleeful and mocking, about the
execution of Karla F. Tucker.

Those incidents convinced me that Bush was a p.o.s.

Had nothing to do with his political party.


You ought to consider what you post here from time to time, especially
when you think you know what is in the head of another person. As
evidenced by your many weird posts here, you're not well equipped for
that sort of duty.