Brain,
Either they (the Bush Admin, that is) have evidence that we are actually in danger, or they don't.
They began making their noises back in early August, I believe. They leaked that an invasion of Iraq was on the table, but said nothing publicly--for the record, that is. The leaks were credible enough that Joe Biden held Senate hearings, even without much Admin input. Then came their Sept blitz and Andy Card's now famous comment about not peddling new product in the summer.
Does that sound like they believed we were in imminent danger then? Or does that sound like an election campaign? If they actually believed that we were in danger back then, then they were incredibly irresponsible for even waiting until Sept, and even more so for not taking their evidence to the UN post haste, and taking care of business immediately. Obviously, there was no imminent danger, though. Their constant lies which were exposed within days or weeks of being put out prove this. Why put out lies if you have real evidence?
Did you see the Bush speech that was made in the final days of the campaign? There was only one speech, with names of people and cities changed to suit the state he was in. It was all, Elect more Republicans so we can get our program enacted. What program? It didn't matter. It was all about Iraq then. Or rather, Iraq and tax cuts. Getting the base excited.
That is what this whole thing is about. That is what has always been about. That is why he had to have the Senate resolution in Oct. He had to have the debate THEN. Not a moment later. Gee, what a surprise. His speech to the UN was surprising only in two respects: it happened at all, and it was fairly literate (that is, he read it fairly well--he surely didn't write it or research it). OK, so Iraq is in violation of resolutions. Well, guess what, the US has been in violation of resolutions too. There were other ways of resolving those violations without threatening war. Iraq got leverage to kick out the inspectors in 98 because they were also engaging in spying, in violation of their mandate. Gee, you mean, gasp, a UN resolution was violated?! Well, nuke 'em!
This is all about winning elections. Maybe it is also a little about oil. Maybe some in the Bush Admin also have some democratic ideals for the mideast, though it's hard to give credence to that as they don't seem to have many democratic ideals for this country. They pretend that they have a mandate to push through their radical program despite the fact that they didn't even win the popular vote?! And won the election in an at best dubious manner? Clinton at least appointed a Republican to an important post, albeit a centrist Republican (Bill Cohen to Defense), when he wanted to signal some bipartisanship.
This people are vile. In their own way, they are as vile as...
no never mind, I won't go there.
Sam
AI
Market Data 
Markets 
