> Saddam had plenty of time to ship the WMDs elsewhere and there is evidence that he very well may have.
Once again our excellent intelligence has no idea where. It's not as if we blindly decided to go in there. We had had our eye on Iraq (whether as an invasion target or not) for quite some time. Where'd they go?
> They're not the majority.
Saddam claimed he didn't have them. The UN inspectors said there was no evidence he had them. Is it more likely that he didn't actually have them, or that Bush is lying?Four out of five Iraqis report holding a negative view of the U.S. occupation authority and of coalition forces, according to a new poll conducted for the occupation authority.
In the poll, 80 percent of the Iraqis questioned reported a lack of confidence in the Coalition Provisional Authority, and 82 percent said they disapprove of the U.S. and allied militaries in Iraq.
> I'll find the source in the morning
IIRC, they found two shells containing long inert sarin gas. If you find any evidence that there have been any of the stockpiles, by all means contact major news locations, because no one's said anything.While I agree that it's silly to impeach every president, if it is found that Bush led us to war based on lies as it appears, then I think it's warranted. 1700 Americans and thousands of Iraqis have died, billions of dollars have been spent. Billions more have been spent on top of what was told to us in the beginning. None of our interests have been advanced, besides propping up a friendly government in the region, which will undoubtedly come back to bite us in the ass.Originally Posted by Bubba