iraq report is in, let the spinn beginFollow

It's actually only 15. Number 16 is out scoring a dime bag.

GBaji did make a valid point in that violating a cease fire agreement is act of war by definition. It was not the reason the US touted when seeking support for the war, but it is a very valid reason and the validity of all future cease fire agreements rests on our determination to punish those who violate them. I was literally jumping mad when Bush announced this whole WMD thing before the invasion, I thought it was pure folly as we did not need such a stretch to find a reason to go to war against Sadam Hussein, and it would undermine the support for future anti terror operations. It is a shame that this has come to be and the looneys in charge of Iran can continue to stay in power.

The conflict now in Iraq has nothing to do with those original reasons to go in there. It is against Al Quaeda insurgents who were not there at the time of the invasion and who are supported by forces outside Iraq. This enemy is the same one who attack us on September 11th and continues to use terrror tactics killing innnocent scivilians in Iraq every day. As much as many disagreed with our reasons for originally going into Iraq, our reasons for staying now have nothing to do with those original misquided political panderings. The reason for staying is to fight these terrorist and stop them from driving us out of Iraq.

Nonsense. Many of the groups and militias we fight today didn't even exist prior to the fall of Iraq. Sure, many attached to Al'Qaeda for support, training, equipment, etc but they're not the same people. When 9/11 happened, they were civilians or Iraqi soldiers -- probably thinking "Well, this is gonna suck for us."

Honestly though, it was touted exactly as such. The violations of the various US resolutions was the number one argument used to try to get the rest of the world to take action against Iraq. The real problem IMO is that those violations included "WMDs" which is an issue that somehow got singled out and over focused.

It's not like a nation attempting to build WMDs is sufficient grounds for invasion. Nor is building new and larger missiles. Nor is even possessing materials to build such weapons. Nor is even possessing the weapons themselves. But they are grounds if those things are listed as the terms of a cease fire agreement that nation signed.



To be fair though, the "whole WMD thing" was one of several violations of said cease fire. It's not like Bush only talked about WMDs. That was one of a list of things used as justification. But that's the one you heard the most about, not because Bush said it more then anything else, but because that's by far the most "spectacular" of the reasons and the one that got the most air time on your local news show.

Should he have not mentioned WMDs at all? Cause that's the only way that part of the justification would not have ended up overshadowing all other reasons in the minds of the people.