The whole "if we knew what the President knew we wouldn't have voted for the war" is lame. The Clinton Administration was calling for war over and over in the late 90's. Hillary had access to the same intelligence as Bill and Algore. This is classic flip-flop. Attack the flip-flop. That was the most successful tactic of 2004.
Why do Republicans allow Dems to reduce the reasons for war to WMDs and our intelligence reports? There was a continuously violated peace treaty, in & of itself grounds for war, 17 violated UN resolutions from the body that Dems say we should have gotten permission from, attempts at genocide for the Kurds and Shiites (reasons Clinton used for Kosovo & Somalia), and on and on. Why can't Republicans remind the people of these things? And , yes, there was the matter of Iraq harboring, training, and funding terrorists.
There is waaaaay to much analysis going on here.
They supported the war then because it was politically expedient to do so.
They oppose the war now because it is politically expedient to do so.
No further analysis is required.
I've heard this three times just this week and this is their answer to their war vote.
Unless WMD some how shows up in a big way the Hildabeast will be President and there's no way to stop her !
Until the Republican Party commits to common sense policies like defending our borders, I don't care what they say about Democrat flip-floppers.
I'm looking hard at the Constitution Party. There seems to be some people there who have the gonads to enforce our laws.
So what that they can't win. Is voting for John McCain over Hillary Clinton some kind of victory?
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
They could have mopped the floor with these people months ago, but they are afraid to spend any money.
When the enemy gets vicious, you have to fight back. We can't depend on conservative commentators alone to diffuse the overbearing influence of the extreme left wing media, left wing hollywood and lying democrat communists.
Quite frankly, the President needs to speak a bit louder. The quiet tones are certainly a strategy, but when the opponents rise to the level of treachery, you have to call them on it, and you have to call them on it loudly and repeatedly.
The democrats almost succeeded in creating a false deadline. The war will be over when its over, and not before. I quote myself "When the world gets so bonkers that people are flying aircraft into our skyscrapers, theres going to be HELL to pay."
1. Saddam kicked out the weapons inspectors. At that point, we were right by obligation to the safety of our people and the peoples of the world to believe every single rumor of WMD that came out of there because we no longer had any inspectors to give us eyes and ears. An elected official must always err on the side of safety, especially when dealing with a tyrant who had been proven to use mustard gas and other WMD's on his own people.
The democrats have succeeded, however, in obfuscating this issue. Largely, because GOP rolled over and let them do it. Can't they find any body with brains to run the thing?
2. We went over there to remove Saddam, because he violated the agreements signed to end the first conflict. Not, because of WMD's, per se. As President Bush said it to the U.N., the U.N. directives had been violated for some twelve years and the directives "must have teeth" or they had no value. After over twelve years of shooting at our aircraft enforcing the no-fly zone, flaunting U.N. directives, it was time to hold Saddam responsible. So when Sen. Waters wants to tell you we were "lied to" she is simply stupid, and I feel sorry for her. Still, she must be corrected at every opportunity and not allowed to get away with such stupidity. Call her on every error.
3. CNN, et al. Because of Saddams repeated defiance, he was embargoed. The embargo was adjusted with the 'oil for food program' which Saddam just used to enrich himself and let his people starve. CNN: Dateline Baghdad "The people are starving." And so, we got day after day after day of "people starving" and "hospitals with no medicines" on our TV sets. So tell me, democrat body counters... how many Iraqis would have died if we had just left the embargo in place? It was not working. Nothing was working. When you deal with a Saddam, Kim, Chavez, or a Hitler, and the idiot in Iraq, there is only one option that works.
4. Having removed Saddam, finding him in his little hidey-hole and having brought him to justice, the safety of millions of Iraq's is now our burden. We have, to borrow a democrat term, 'invested' billions of dollars in building up infrastructure, much as we did for Germany and France. We have built dozens of brand spanking new clinics with pharmacies, installed new power substations to replace a decayed old one, installed a 911 emergency phone service for the first time. We have trained and equiped their armies and police. We have done a lot in our time there, and we have done well, and we are nearing the completion of the task. We have invested our own lives and blood in this struggle. We are winning, and we will have victory if we have to drag Pelosi and her panty-waist pacifists miles along the way.
The democrats must rush in a big hurry now that Saddam is dead and 20,000 heros are going to crush the enemy, because there is still a dim possibility that they can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. May God Speed Our Troops!