The part that I found ludicrous was the suggestion the Rummy should have arrested him in 83.

Now if Saddam has been a brutal dictator for three decades, and therfore a WMD, why did Reagan send Rumsfeld to meet Saddam in a cordial ceremony where Rumsfeld shook hands with Hussein, whom Rumsfeld says was a WMD? Wasn’t 1983 within the three decade time frame given by Rumsfeld?

One way or another, Rumsfeld is trying to have it both ways, and in so doing has implecated himself and the Reagan-Bush Administration with coersion of a brutal dictator–a WMD.

Can’t you see the irony?

Bush said Iraq had WMD. Rather anyone believed Bush is irreleveant because Bush never showed any eveidence that Iraq HAD WMD. Never! Certainly not enough to get support of the majority of nations to go to war.

Look at the historical record of the Reagan-Bush Administration. Most of what Saddam bought was financed by the US. Not to mention whatever the corporate arms and munitions manufacturers could sell or broker.

When Saddam was ready to get his newly constructed nuclear power plant online in the early 80’s, the Israeli airfoce blew it to hell. Reagan scolded the Israelis, because US companies helped build it. Was Saddam a WMD back then?

Donald Rumsfeld shook Saddam’s hand within the same time frame (3 decades) that he claimed the brutal dictator WAS a weapon of mass destruction. Why is that not an issue, in light of all the dead Americans that could have been spared if Rumsfeld just arrested Saddam in ‘83.

Bush said Iraq had WMD. Rather anyone believed Bush is irreleveant because Bush never showed any eveidence that Iraq HAD WMD. Never! Certainly not enough to get support of the majority of nations to go to war.

Look at the historical record of the Reagan-Bush Administration. Most of what Saddam bought was financed by the US. Not to mention whatever the corporate arms and munitions manufacturers could sell or broker.

When Saddam was ready to get his newly constructed nuclear power plant online in the early 80’s, the Israeli airfoce blew it to hell. Reagan scolded the Israelis, because US companies helped build it. Was Saddam a WMD back then?

Donald Rumsfeld shook Saddam’s hand within the same time frame (3 decades) that he claimed the brutal dictator WAS a weapon of mass destruction. Why is that not an issue, in light of all the dead Americans that could have been spared if Rumsfeld just arrested Saddam in ‘83.

Bush said Iraq had WMD. Rather anyone believed Bush is irreleveant because Bush never showed any eveidence that Iraq HAD WMD. Never! Certainly not enough to get support of the majority of nations to go to war.

Look at the historical record of the Reagan-Bush Administration. Most of what Saddam bought was financed by the US. Not to mention whatever the corporate arms and munitions manufacturers could sell or broker.

When Saddam was ready to get his newly constructed nuclear power plant online in the early 80’s, the Israeli airfoce blew it to hell. Reagan scolded the Israelis, because US companies helped build it. Was Saddam a WMD back then?

Donald Rumsfeld shook Saddam’s hand within the same time frame (3 decades) that he claimed the brutal dictator WAS a weapon of mass destruction. Why is that not an issue, in light of all the dead Americans that could have been spared if Rumsfeld just arrested Saddam in ‘83.

And, the legal reasoning in the Texas sodomy case was far from conservative, even if one could argue (as would I), that there was a liberty issue at hand. Indeed, the ruling was more libertarian than conservative. Indeed, it is rather hard to argue that it was in any way conservative.

I think you need to review your history in regards to precisely where most of Iraq’s amr camwe from (Russia (USSR) and France)

Plus, you are changing the subject: your initial claim was that it was all lies about WMDs, now you agree he had them?

And, of course, President Clinton, the UN and Europeans government (including those who did not support the war) all believed that Saddam had WMDS.

Care to try again?

He lied blatantly to the American people to send our troops to war. This wasn’t no lie about rather or not he cheated on his wife..

Bush’s lies are killing Americans while his rich corporate buddies profit off their blood while the bodies are still warm.

Yes, Dean is right, if not understating it!