[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

Maybe you weren't aware that the original foreign policy of regime change, by use of military force if necessary, was initiated by President Clinton.

And yet, he didn't invade.

Perhaps you didn't know that it was Clinton's CIA head who called the WMD a "slam dunk" before the Downing Street memo.

At the time, he was Bush's CIA head. He was wrong, and was given a medal.

Perhaps you didn't concern yourself, pre-war, with the fact that sanctions were a failure as a policy and that the UN became more interested in preserving the status quo than in solving the problems involved, possibly due to corruption.

The US kicked out the inspectors, who were in the country, inspecting, before the invasion. The sanctions were indeed poorly implemented, and Bush was successful in getting inspections restarted. Unfortunately, that was just for looks, and the new round of inspections wasn't allowed to continue.

Maybe you weren't paying attention when the Saudis changed their own stripes to actively pursue al Qaeda.

I'll bet they did. Wasn't Al Qaeda's central purpose to overthrow the Saudi monarchy?

Maybe you didn't care that a lot of the anti-war rationales worldwide were due to oil contracts given to the various Hussein supporters.

A lot of the pro-war rationales were from suspect sources as well.

Could it be the administration's non-WMD rationales were very much a part of the stated pre-war justification and that all those rationales are forgotten or ignored by your sources?

Maybe. Which ones? They played with quite a few before settling on WMD.

Did you not pay attention to Saddam's support for other terrorists or the link to the 1993 WTC bombing, or are those thing not really relevant to you?

Is that from the woman who also thinks 9-11 and Oklahoma City were also planned from Iraq? Or was there some other connection ,too?

Sorry for the stupid attitude I take here, I can't help myself, I would not be an asshole in real life.

Likewise, I'm sure.