Subject:
|
Re: The Missing Terrorist Link?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 28 Mar 2003 13:50:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
274 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> > It may be premature to say "I told you so", but this doesn't look good for the
> > case for those who oppose the war.
<snip>
>
> "Top Rumsfeld adviser resigns over ethics"
> http://www.upi.com/view.cfm?StoryID=20030327-071406-2705r
>
> Because all of these guys have no motive and come to the table with clean
> hands and no agenda.
>
> -- Hop-Frog
"Perle has been a leading, albeit somewhat free lance, voice in the Bush
administration for a war with Iraq.
As a campaign adviser, he suggested in 2000 to a Senate committee that Bush
would oust Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein if he were elected.
"Governor Bush has said ... he would fully implement the Iraq Liberation
Act. We all understand what that means. It means a serious and sustained
effort to assist the opposition with a view to bringing down Saddam's
regime," Perle said.
In October 2001 -- just as the war in Afghanistan was beginning -- Perle
told PBS the next target of the U.S. military should be Saddam."
Things that not only make me go, "Hmmm...", but moreover, things that make
me say to all you "war on terror" blinded people--read and understand--Bush
'signed off' on a war with SH *before* 9/11 and *before* AQ came on 'global
radar'.
So again, come up with another one...
Dave K
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: The Missing Terrorist Link?
|
| (...) Get over yourself -- there is no "I told you so" until this fiasco is over and the contracts have been settled. I was dismayed at the analysis run on BBC's pages today where the basic assertion was that Iraq was a long term investment and was (...) (21 years ago, 28-Mar-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
