Col you sound just like this person. Do you agree with his statement?

You entered Iraq with lies, you will lose Iraq and lie about it and you will leave with the pretext that you have completed your mission. . . . America only has to decide on the number of (troops) it wishes to lose before withdrawing."

I think you and the person who made that quote think the same.

First off....NO ONE here has ever made the claim that "Slick Willie" invaded Iraq. What they "did" say was that Clinton is the one that first claimed there was a link between Saddam and Al-Queda. And you have been jumping the Cheney's butt saying he's wrong for making that same comment. But if Clinton said the same damn thing, why then that's alright.

I see he ignores this fact.

It is NOT True that Congress had the same intel as Bush. Members of Congress have said they DID not have the same intel as Bush and Cheney. WHY did Bush ignore the CIA, Dept of Energy and DIA that showed multiple elements of what he claimed were not correct?

It is NOT True that Congress had the same intel as Bush. Members of Congress have said they DID not have the same intel as Bush and Cheney.

What intelligence would that be col? I have seen many CIA officials say Congress had the same intel.

I see you keep ignoring the facts that have been presented to you.

AGAIN people, stop feeding the j.u. troll. Let him die from a lack of attention....

I agree, I will no longer post on Col's articles. No point in trying to make someone understand when he is 100% sure of himself. It is not our purpose to make Col change his mind but to point out his mistakes when he lets his mind do the talking. So have fun Col, I may only come around just to point out major spelling problems since that is also one of your biggest problems.

Try the google toolbar, it at least has a spell checker.

Still waiting for an answer for post #46.

Island Dog

Cheney was telling us that Saddam had WMD and that we could not wait to attack him or we could see a mushroom Cloud over our cities. At the same time, CIA was telling the Bush Admin that it was unllikely Saddam had an active Nuclear program and that he had nothing that was near term. Bush told us the Al Tubes were proof he was developing weapons and DOE , the most knowledgable government agency about nuclear technology, was telling Bush the tubes were NOT part of a nuclear program. The CIA discredited the Yellow cake stroy but Bush included it in the State of the Union Speech. CIA discounted the mobile lab story but the Bush Admin pushed it. Much of the so called intel about Saddam having WMD came from Ahmad Chalabi a convicted fellon and person that had a vested interest in the U S removing Saddam. Bush did not tell Congress that Mr Chalabi was the sole source of much of the intel and did not tell Congress the fact that CIA, DOE and DIA presented information that did not agree with the Bush/Cheney assertion that we were in immediate danger ( the Mushroom cloud). Both Bush and Cheney stated as FACT that Saddam had WMD dispite the fact that three Federal agencies provided Bush and Cheney with evidence their claims might not be correct. Below is a anticle about the Star Source that Bush used to make his case for War. Almost EVERYTHING Chalabi told the Bush admin was a LIE!

Ahmed Chalabi
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia that anyone can edit.
Jump to: navigation, search
Ahmed Chalabi
Enlarge
Ahmed Chalabi

Ahmed Abdel Hadi Chalabi1 (Arabic: احمد الجلبي) (born October 30, 1944) is a deputy prime minister in Iraq, and formerly interim oil minister [1]. Once dubbed the "George Washington of Iraq" by American Neoconservatives, he has since fallen out of favor and is currently under investigation by several government sources.

Chalabi is also part of a three-man executive council for the umbrella Iraqi opposition group, the Iraqi National Congress (INC), created in 1992 for the purpose of fomenting the overthrow of Iraqi president Saddam Hussein. The INC received major funding and assistance from the United States.

Chalabi is a controversial figure for many reasons. In the lead-up to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, under his guidance the INC provided a major portion of the information on which U.S. Intelligence based its condemnation of Saddam Hussein, including reports of weapons of mass destruction and alleged ties to al-Qaeda. Much of this information has turned out to be false, and led to a recent falling out between him and the United States. Initially, Chalabi enjoyed a cozy political and business relationships with some members of the U.S. government, including some prominent neoconservatives within the Pentagon. Chalabi is said to have had political contacts within the Project for the New American Century, most notably with Paul Wolfowitz, a student of nuclear strategist Albert Wohlstetter and Richard Perle who was introduced to Chalabi by Wohlstetter in 1985. He also enjoyed considerable support among politicians and political pundits in the United States, most notably Jim Hoagland of The Washington Post, who held him up as a notable force for democracy in Iraq. Chalabi's opponents, on the other hand see him as a charlatan of questionable allegiance, out of touch with Iraq and with no effective power base there, and an escrow. [2].
Contents
[hide]

* 1 History
* 2 Invasion of Iraq
* 3 Falling out with the U.S.
* 4 Iraqi Elections 2005
* 5 Trivia
* 6 Footnotes
* 7 External links
* 8 References
* 9 Timelines
* 10 Note

[edit]

History

Chalabi is the scion of a prominent Shi'a family, one of the wealthy power elite of Baghdad, where he was born. Chalabi left Iraq with his family in 1956 and spent most of his life in the USA and the UK. In 1965, he received an SB degree in Mathematics from MIT. In 1969, he received a Ph.D. in mathematics from the University of Chicago (dissertation title: On the Jacobson Radical of a Group Ring, see [3]), after which he took a position in the mathematics department at the American University of Beirut.

In 1977 he founded the Petra Bank in Jordan. After the bank's failure, Chalabi was convicted and sentenced in absentia for bank fraud by a Jordanian military tribunal. He fled the country -- the manner of his departure is itself a matter of dispute. He faces seventeen years in prison, should he again enter Jordan. Chalabi maintains that his prosecution was a politically motivated effort to discredit him. (BBC profile, 2002). In May 2005 it was reported [4] that King Abdullah of Jordan promised to pardon Chalabi, in part to ease the relations between Jordan and the new Iraqi government of which Chalabi is a member. According to one report, Chalabi proposed a 32 million dollar compensation fund for depositers affected by Petra Bank's failure.

He was involved in organizing a resistance movement among Kurds in northern Iraq in the mid-1990s. When that effort was crushed and hundreds of his supporters were killed, Chalabi fled the country. Chalabi lobbied in Washington for the passage of the Iraq Liberation Act (passed February 1998), which earmarked USD $97 million to support Iraqi opposition groups, virtually all of which was funneled through the INC.

Chalabi has been accused by some opposition figures of using the INC to further his own ambitions.

There are also allegations of financial improprieties, as mentioned above.

Although he has always maintained the case was a plot to frame him by Baghdad, the issue was revisited later when the State Department raised questions about the INC's accounting practices.
[edit]

Invasion of Iraq

As U.S. forces took control during the 2003 Invasion of Iraq, Chalabi returned under their aegis and was given a position on the Iraq interim governing council by the Coalition Provisional Authority. He served as president of the council in September 2003. He denounced a plan to let the UN choose an interim government for Iraq. "We are grateful to President Bush for liberating Iraq, but it is time for the Iraqi people to run their affairs," he was quoted as saying (NY Times).

In August 2003, the U.S. State Dept. conducted a poll among Iraqis and Chalabi was the only candidate whose unfavorable ratings exceeded his favorabale ones.[5] In a survey of nearly 3000 Iraqis in February 2004 (by Oxford Research International, sponsored by the BBC in the United Kingdom, ABC in the U.S., ARD of Germany, and the NHK in Japan), only 0.2% of respondents said he was the most trustworthy leader in Iraq (see survey link below, question #13). A secret document written in 2002 by the British Overseas and Defence Secretariat reportedly described Chalabi as "a convicted fraudster popular on Capitol Hill". [6]

Before the war, the CIA was largely skeptical of Chalabi and the INC, but information from his group (most famously from a defector codenamed "Curveball") made its way into intelligence dossiers used to help convince the public in America and Britain of the need to go to war. "Curveball" – the brother of a top lieutenant of Chalabi – fed hundreds of pages of bogus "firsthand" descriptions of mobile biological weapons factories on wheels and rails. Secretary of State Colin Powell later used this information in a UN presentation trying to garner support for the war, despite warnings from German intelligence that "Curveball" was fabricating claims. Since then, the CIA has admitted that the defector made up the story, and Colin Powell apologized for using the information in his speech.

The INC often worked with the media, most notably with Judith Miller, concerning her sensational WMD stories for the New York Times. After the war, given the lack of discovery of WMDs, most of the WMD claims of the INC were shown to have been either misleading, exaggerated, or completely made up while INC information about the whereabouts of Saddam Hussein's loyalists and Chalabi's personal enemies were accurate.

In response to the controversy, Chalabi told London's Daily Telegraph in February 2004, "We are heroes in error. As far as we're concerned, we've been entirely successful. That tyrant Saddam is gone and the Americans are in Baghdad. What was said before is not important. The Bush administration is looking for a scapegoat."

Throughout the period, Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress was paid $335,000 per month by the Pentagon for the intelligence provided. In addition, the U.S. State Department paid over $33 million, according to a U.S. General Accounting office report in 2004.
[edit]

Falling out with the U.S.

As Chalabi's position of trust with the Pentagon crumbled, he found a new political position as a champion of Iraq's Shi'ites (Chalabi himself is a Shi'ite). Beginning January 25, 2004, Chalabi and his close associates promoted the claim that leaders around the world were illegally profiting from the Oil for Food program. These charges were around the same time that UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi indicated that Chalabi would likely not be welcome in a future Iraqi government. Up until this time, Chalabi had been mentioned formally several times in connection with possible future leadership positions. Chalabi contends that documents in his possession detail the misconduct, but he has yet to provide any documents or other evidence. The U.S. has sharply criticized Chalabi's Oil for Food investigation as undermining the credibility of its own.

Additionally, Chalabi and other members of the INC have been being investigated for fraud involving the exchange of Iraqi currency, grand theft of both national and private assets, and many other criminal charges in Iraq. On May 19, 2004 the U.S. government discontinued their regular payments to Chalabi for information he provided. Then on May 20, Iraqi police supported by U.S. soldiers raided his offices and residence, taking documents and computers, presumably to be used as evidence. A major target of the raid was Aras Habib, Chalabi's long-term director of intelligence, who controls the vast network of agents bankrolled by U.S. funding.

In June 2004, it was reported that Chalabi gave U.S. state secrets to Iran in April, including the fact that one of the United States' most valuable sources of Iranian intelligence was a broken Iranian code used by their spy services. Chalabi allegedly learned of the code through a drunk American involved in the code-breaking operation. Chalabi has denied all of the charges, and nothing has ever come of the charges nor do the Iraqi or U.S. governments currently seemed very interested in pursuing them. [7]

An arrest warrant for alleged counterfeiting was issued for Chalabi on August 8, 2004, while at the same time a warrant was issued on murder charges against his nephew Salem Chalabi (at the time, head of the Iraqi Special Tribunal), while they both were out of the country. Chalabi returned to Iraq on August 10 planning to make himself available to Iraqi government officials, but he was never arrested. Charges were later dropped against Ahmed Chalabi, with Judge Zuhair al-Maliki citing lack of evidence.

On September 1, 2004 Chalabi told reporters of an assassination attempt near Latifiya, a town south of Baghdad. Chalabi was said to be returning from a meeting with Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani in Najaf, where a few days earlier a cease fire had taken effect, ending three weeks of confrontations between followers of Muqtada al-Sadr and the U.S. military.

He regained enough credibility to be made deputy prime minister on 2005 April 28. At the same time he was made acting oil minister until the new government could agree on a permanent one.[8]

Col, wikipedia is not a factual website. However, you completely ignore everything that has been presented to you. If Bush is a liar, is Clinton and all the democrats who said the same thing?

And I'm still waiting for an answer about the other post.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998 "This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others "Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002 "Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998 "(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998 "Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002 "The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002 "There's no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat... Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He's had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001... He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn't have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we." -- Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002 "What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad's regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs." -- Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002 "The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998 "In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002 "I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out." -- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003 "Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people." -- Tom Daschle in 1998 "Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002 "The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002 "I share the administration's goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction." -- Dick Gephardt in September of 2002 "Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, 2002 "We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Bob Graham, December 2002 "Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction." -- Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002 "We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002 "There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002 "I will be voting to give the president of the United States the authority to use force - if necessary - to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- John F. Kerry, Oct 2002 "The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation." -- John Kerry, October 9, 2002 "(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. ...And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War." -- John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003 "We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." -- Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002 "Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States." -- Joe Lieberman, August, 2002 "Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq's denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq's claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction." -- Patty Murray, October 9, 2002 "As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998 "Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production." -- Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998 "There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources -- something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002 "Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East." -- John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002 "Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts." -- Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

You do not listen to what I have said. I said, that Bush and Cheney ONLY used that intel that supported what they wanted to do in Iraq. The President had intel that did not support what he was saying as established FACT. As it turns out, what Bush and Cheney said has been shown to be almost totally wrong and the Intel that Bush and Cheney ignored was correct.

The second thing I have said is that members of Congress were NOT given much of the Intel that did not support Bush BEFORE they were asked to vote on the War.


I do not know what intel Clinton had available to him that said Saddam did not have the WMD. The issue is was Saddam such an immanent threat that required the United States to attack Iraq in early 2003. That was a lie and Clinton NEVER invaded Iraq nor did he claim Saddam was such a danger that we should invade Iraq. He thought Saddam was evil and we would be better if he were deposed but NOT BY THE USE OF OUR TROOPS. Today we have a situation where 70% of the Iraq people want us out of Iraq. Today Bush also acknowledged that 30,000 Iraqi people died since our invasion of Iraq. Today another example of the same sort of abuse that Saddam used is taking place by the military we are training and put into power. This is not helpong us in the Moslem World

That was a lie and Clinton NEVER invaded Iraq nor did he claim Saddam was such a danger that we should invade Iraq.

That's because "Slick Willie" was such a big puss!

ou do not listen to what I have said. I said, that Bush and Cheney ONLY used that intel that supported what they wanted to do in Iraq.

We don't listen because you provide no facts.

The second thing I have said is that members of Congress were NOT given much of the Intel that did not support Bush BEFORE they were asked to vote on the War.

And you are wrong as usual. Democrats believed Saddam had WMD and that Saddam was a threat way before Bush was elected.

I will ask again col. Do you agree with this person?

"You entered Iraq with lies, you will lose Iraq and lie about it and you will leave with the pretext that you have completed your mission. . . . America only has to decide on the number of (troops) it wishes to lose before withdrawing.""

They believed it because of what Bush said and because they were not given all the intel that refuted the Bush/Cheney claims. If everyone, Republicans and Democtrats would have known what they know today, there would have been NO approvel to invade Iraq. If they had the intel Bush ignored, there would not have been a war.

No reasonable person would have gone to war on the word of someone like Ahmade Chalabi. He told Bush what supported what Bush wanted to hear but the average person would never have accepted what Chalabi said as fact if they knew who he was and what he had to get out of us removing Saddam.

If everyone, Republicans and Democtrats would have known what they know today, there would have been NO approvel to invade Iraq.

I've pointed out as nicely as I could in multiple threads where you made this claim what speculative garbage it is. You keep making it without any basis. There cannot be a basis for this because the bell can't be unrung, Gene. God bless you, but you have no more idea what would have happened in your hypothetical scenario than your dog does.

I hope you keep this up, though, because nothing else you've said makes you look any more foolish, or undercuts your credibility more. I can't imagine a more politically pretentious position.

Cheers,
Daiwa

My question is how many times does this have to be pointed out to COL Gene before he finally understands...?

Yet he still comes back with almost the same verbatim quote about Bush and Cheney having bad intel before Congress, it's not the same intel that Congress had... blah blah blah.

I'm with DJBandit. I love being right, but I feel like I'm hitting my head against the same brick wall over and over again.

Have a good life, COL Gene. Enjoy your delusional fantasy world. You are so damn wrong you don't even know how wrong you are. And not just about this. I don't even know what planet you're living on. All I can do is shake my head and pity you. God be with you, buddy, and Merry Christmas.

Col Gene, as usual, is spot on. We have been saying the same thing on our posts for more than a year, Now that is clear that the USA will have to exit from Iraq without a plan to put together a stable legitimate government in Iraq, that country will emerge as a great threat to US political interests in the region. This could have been avoided if only Bush had focussed on the WAr against Terror and not tilting against windmills.