[TheRealThing]

Wonder why he did not respond to this response?

Listen, sorry to gang up on you Wildcat. Dusty was agreeing with me for the most part. Quote-- "He did, kind of sorta.... Don't get me wrong, I'm on your side". My comment wasn't a quote, it was a paraphrase for the sake of clarity. I remember the epic 'tit for tat' between the Bush admin and the flesh eating dems seeking to destroy W's credibility, in vivid detail. And, I just outlined the dems true intentions and background information in my last post. I didn't respond to Dusty's comment because his was one of support. If you're having that much difficulty discerning which way the evidence is pointing, I'll give you the capsulated version--- The ones who lack the thinnest shred of proof to support their position are the dems. Let me guide you through how ridiculous what they said really is.

The dems have accused Bush of just inventing the existance of WMD's in Iraq as an excuse to invade. All the intel was beyon question as it was presented to the US congress for the vote. You can't just say they got WMD's and then take a vote. Real evidence had to be presented along with pictures and etc. The Bush administration simply said, and without any dancing around about it, that by the time we got there, the WMD's were gone, most likely to Syria. Where, pray tell, is the lie in that statement? We have an ever expanding resource of intel supporting the validity of the present whereabouts of the WMD's located in Syria. Including aerial photographic intel, the real flight manifests, and the General in charge. The Bush administration didn't whine about the missing WMD's, though their presence would have given him the vidication he would later need in the face of viscious and wholly fabricated charges of having a happy trigger finger. Rather, W merely acknowleged the unfortunate timing and shouldered the blame.

It would be one thing if the charges leveled by the dems were true. However, one would have to assume men and women worthy of world leadership would have just a tad more integrity than to vote for war one minute and and feign innocence the next. They knew the whole intelligence picture back when W was president. They knew exactly what kinds of WMD's Saddam had and relatively how many. Not much later they knew the WMD's were in Syria. They recognized the opportunity to destroy W's reputation lay before them. They then seized the opportunity without the slightest pang of conscience. I contend such are not the actions of men and women who love their country. The whole sordid mess has diminished our national reputation. But, in the mind of today's democrat, a nose diving economy, grid locked government, global consternation and trading our national integrity for the image of lying if it suits us, are acceptable concessions in the pursuit of power.

In short, there is a mountain of evidence (already outlined) which supports the developement and deployment of biological and chemical agents deliverable in what are known as WMD's by the regime of Saddam Hussein. Those same kinds of WMD's are now known to have been transported to Syria, from Iraq, where they remain to this day. So the dems argument that they never existed is not supported by any known evidence. And the only people saying this are the Saddam Hussein Regime and certain democrat members of the congress of the United States. Now, maybe that gives you some measure of comfort but, I think it's strange bedfellows indeed. Isn't that taking the old axiom of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" to extremes? We got members of the democrat party backing up members of Saddam's ba'ath party. :please: