GermanStar - 11/5/2005 10:07 PM
GW actually said that Saddam was responsible for the 9/11 attack. Don't believe me? Check the transcript of the first Bush/Kerry debate. I heard it with my own ears.
Please show me where Bush said "Saddam was responsible for the 9/11 attack" or post a pink embarrassed smiley.
I suspect I would have heeded the advice of the U.N. weapons inspectors and all of our allies in the region,
You mean the "oil for food" crew?
You mean our allies like Russia, France, and Germany? The guys on the take? The guys who didn't want to disrupt their cash flow and be discovered. The guys who sold Iraq GPS jamming gear to thwart our smart bombs...which promptly zeroed in on the jammers and blew them up. Ha!
and pursued Bin Laden and others who were complicit in the 9/11 attack,
Bush did. In Afghanistan. the Taliban no longer runs the country, and Bin Laden is living on the run.
rather than engage Iraq for no good reason.
It was not an either/or choice. We did both, and we still are.
If Saddam posed no threat to any of it's neighbors (just ask them -- they'll tell you) they were certainly no threat to the U.S., half a world away. It seemed pretty clear that Saddam had lost his teeth after the ass-whooping he received 10 years prior. BTW, no one opposed this invasion more than Bush I.
The threat was the nexus of a state willing to sponsor terrorism, WMDs, and the terrorists willing to die killing us. It was never the threat of 1970s Soviet tanks driven by Republican Guard up my suburban street a la "Red Dawn".
I would not be surprised if Gore, Kerry, or the elder Bush would have opted out of unilateral action to weaken our enemies. That makes all three equally misguided and unfit for the job in my mind.