Posted on 09/16/2002 5:17:48 AM PDT by 11th Earl of Mar
As Pat indicates, Bush has no hard evidence. Thus, in Bush's well received UN speech he grounded his argument for the attack on Iraq on the ground of Iraq's unwillingness to cooperate with the UN's directives and deemphasized the argument that you wish he had stuck with.
You people are arguing for the existence of evidence that does not exist or Bush is unable to reveal. The administration, following the good advice of the Sec. of State much maligned here lately, has now moved on to a different, better argument. Unlike so many of the posters here, Buchanan saw that the emperor had no clothes just as had many other unconvinced world leaders to whom Bush would presumably have given proof of his evidence if he had had it.
Thanks for the post.
He will never side with Israel under any circumstances.
A nefarious and vocal few here still eat Pat up.
You lying pile of dung. No one said that. No one at all.
Perhaps you two could learn a thing or two from someone you disagree with, rather than just infantile name calling.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
I agree. Buchanan is a good man, but horribly misguided in his isolationism.
If our country had a consistent policy against terrorists we would have annihilated the KLA then, and Saddam now.
I'm baffled and dismayed at Buchanan's stance on Saddam.
Hardly. Most conservatives have no use for Kristol and his neo-cons. Pat may be right on some issues, but he's wrong about this one.
Really Betty, your "Dr Hamza" defected in 1994! Have you got a little fresher info, especially in the light of the fact that after 11 years GWB discovers this nuclear bomb just in time for (almost to the day of) his anticipated invasion?
As usual, Pat is more right than wrong .... same as he was when he was the voice in the wilderness on "immigration policy gone mad".
BTW, is Saddam going to deliver this thing by camel or by shoe bomber?
Quite seriously, could you please cite a specific or two?
He actually lacks charges serious enough to justify a presumptive strike.
Now, if he would turn his guns a little westward toward the despicable Saudis I could jump on his war wagon!
One man's isolationism is another man's anti-imperialism.
I always look forward to the thoughtful, insightful posts that flood the Pat threads.
Give it some serious thought ... you might just come to a conclusion similar to your Serbian one.
That is decidedly NOT what the man said.
In this case, why not? I mean, there wouldn't be anymore Israel under such a scenario, so saying something nice about it wouldn't cost a thing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.