Yeah, but just one point. I must be dumb because I never got the impression that there was a connection between 9-11 and the war, from W or anyone else. I always thought it was because they're bad guys also, so lets get them before they get us too.:)

You are kidding, right?

I mean...really Bruce, you are a kidder from way back. You're not serious are you? :eek:

No, that is not what he believed. He informed US officials that he was bluffing and had no intention of invading. Then, he invaded. His intentions were to catch the world with its guard down and it worked. At no time did the United States sanction an invasion that was clearly contrary to its interests.

As a heart attack. I knew Osama's history and his Afghan, Sudan and Saudi connections. If anyone made a 9-11/ Iraq connection I must have dismissed it subconsciously, knowing it was farfetched. I heard a lot of other reasons but not that one.:)

edit-I should clarify that I’ve heard the accusation that W made that connection. Shit TW was saying that before the hostilities actually started. But I never heard anyone in the administration make that claim.

No, that's not what Moore said to Letterman (I was glued to the TV throughout the interview). As I pointed out earlier in this thread, Moore got the idea for the propoganda film (its not a documentary) from an article in the New Yorker that he read immediately after 9/11.

What pissed Moore off was the allegation (presented as a fact in the article - not unlike Moore's movies) that the bin Laden family were given a free pass to fly when all other planes were grounded. Moore had to drive from LA to New York (his flight was cancelled) so he had a chip on his shoulder about it.

While the Iraq war figures prominently in the film, it was not the justification for the film (notice also the film title).

IMHO, Bush was looking for a reason to invade Iraq and 9/11 gave him perfect cover (or so he thought). I agree, however, that the Saddam-Al Queada link was not the primary justification.

But, its Moore's fictional, Oliver Stone-like work that we are discussing and not the war itself.

I did not say that they did, just that Saddam believed it. He thought that if he invaded, the world would sit back and say OK. I know that the US would never agree to that.

If that link was the primary justification, who said it and when or was it just alluded to?:confused:

You are correct. I got a little carried away. Sorry. :(

Don't be sorry, it's your thread and you can lead it anywhere you want,:D

The primary justification as I recall was WMD and the letter that some dude at the CIA wrote up at Kinko's supposedly confirming Saddam's purchase of Nigerian yellowcake - a theory about as sound as those Nigerian spam mails I get. :rolleyes: The letter was signed by a Nigerian diplomat. Problem is, that diplomat retired some three years prior to the date of the letter (god help us).

Bush laid the groundwork for the attack in his State of the Union address and I'd be hard pressed to find the Saddam-Osama link in its text. It was pretty well known that Osama didn't care much for Saddam since he's not much of a Muslim and ran a secular government. Now, the idea that Atta met up with an Iraqi intel agent gained some traction in the talk show curcuit but I don't think that had much to do with it.

Basically, justification be damned, I think W's mind was made up probably before he took office and he was just looking for an excuse and he was dumb enough to believe those clowns who advise him.

Plus they were part of the axis of evil.;)

edit- Hey I wonder if that's the same Nigerian that left all the money I'm gonna get.:)

I wasn't correcting you. Sorry if it came off that way. :blush:

That lecturer title UT gave me is going straight to my head :)

So right now Bush's best arguments for the war came from an ex-Iraqi whose offices authorities recently raided and an ex-KGB officer/politician who is reintroducing Russia to authoritarian rule (and who probably helped Bush draft the Patriot Act).

OK, the last bit is just a wild guess, but what do you think Bush and Putin talk about? I wouldn't be surprised if Bush isn't exchanging lessons in running a democracy for ones in stifling dissent and intimidating opponents.

He says now that he said it then. At the time, there was no hint he had said it.