Iraq Poll

[jt1]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm not even sure what this refers to. Did Bush imply that Sadaam backed Al Qaeda? That would be bizarre. Sadaam & Al Qaeda were never friendly at all.

However, I can tell you from first hand knowledge that Sadaam backed terrorist training camps operating in Iraq prior to Desert Storm. I can also tell you from second hand knowledge (from a very close personal friend) that they were still operating shortly before the invasion of Iraq. In my mind, following 9/11 this was reason enough to invade Iraq.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is good sh**. Every now and then I read something on this forum that shaps my opinions. MMMMM posted something the other day and also responding to other posters sometimes helps me better understand their point of view.

And to BluffTHIS!, this is why I favor being able to change your mind.

However, no offense to the ex-marine, but there are CIA documents strong doubting claims by Iraqi refugees that Saddam and Al Qaida were in cahoots. These documents are availalbe for public persual. Furthermore, even if you are a trustworthy source, Iran was a big player in the terrorist game too and their governments idealogy, intentions, and capabilities are more dangerous than Saddam's ever were.

But at the very least, we can agree that after conquering Iraq, Bush should have guarded the Syrian and Iranian border to prevent their governments from supplying any potential insurgencies, and he should have had a plan to prevent sectarian conflicts. He should also have prepared us for higher gas prices, thousands of casualties, an extended occupation: a decieved electorate can't be blamed for retreating when they were never told what an invasion would actually entail. DON'T BLAME THE JANITOR FOR QUITTING WHEN THE GUY WHO HIRED HIM SAID HE WAS TO BE A STOCK BROKER. Blame the guy who hired him