Because no evidence was found linking Saddam to
9/11. which reminds me of this fable:-
One day a lamb was drinking from a stream when a wolf
comes along and said "I am going to eat you because
you are polluting my drinking water' the lamb answered
"That's not possible, I am downstream and you are up-
stream." to which the wolf replied "Oh, I don't care, I am
going to eat you anyways."
2006-11-05 04:04:36
·
answer #1
·
answered by CAPTAIN BEAR 6
·
2⤊
0⤋
Bush never said that Saddam Hussein and Iraq ever had a direct link to what happened on 9/11.
The link was terrorism. Simply put... Saddam promoted terror.
I find it curious that people have such a problem with admitting to that.
Saddam=Terror
2006-11-05 03:50:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
you need to no longer have heard the clock ticking while each and every of the anti-Bush whiners clammed up good after 9/11. Mature adults who pay interest knew they might initiate as quickly as they theory it replaced into risk-free. And, no, the whining did no longer initiate basically while he invaded Iraq. in certainty, as quickly as he began shifting troops into the Afghanistan theater the left wingers restarted their 8-3 hundred and sixty 5 days hissy greater healthful.what's maximum galling is that there have been greater suitable than sufficient genuine bush failures to ***** approximately. yet that may no longer in any respect sufficient while politics and capacity and celebration are greater substantial than u . s . a .. the two facets do it, with the intention to fake there is a few profound distinction between what partisan hacks on the left did then and what partisan hacks on the spectacular are doing now could be laughable. The GOP and the DNC play a never-ending interest of divide and triumph over. They consolidate each and every of the sheep into 2 camps and then dominate them via conserving them at one yet another's throats on an analogous time as they play their little money and capacity interest on an analogous time as the imbeciles are distracted with nonsense like presidential holiday trips (the two performed this card), abortion (never going to be unlawful), questions of patriotism (meaningless nonsense), and so forth, and so forth. Time to improve up human beings. the two events SUCK!
2016-10-15 09:58:58
·
answer #3
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
They are afflicted with a newly discovered psychological affliction dubbed by those in the know as F.O,S. (full of ----). Bush is a the first person to have been diagnosed with this sad and disfiguring disease. It's symptoms include grim looking facial features when libs point out truths to them, such as how they used fear to obtain political power. This grim look soon evolves (a term they don't particularly enjoy as it reminds them of a certain Darwin character which pisses of the politically powerful but "nutssy" evangelicles) into a permanent scowl on the face which even Botox can't cure. No liberals have ever been known to succumb to this dilapidating world wide epidemic, and this has been accredited to their ability to tell the truth (and also that they let their gass pass as opposed to holding it in). In summation, I would highly encourage every one to vote Democrat this Tues.. as this has been shown to be the only cure for F.O,S,
2006-11-05 04:04:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Bush tried to link Iraq to everything for a while. Seems like he wanted to go after Iraq for a long time.
2006-11-05 03:59:14
·
answer #5
·
answered by kelly 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
"Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaida." -- State of the Union Address (1/28/2003).
2006-11-05 03:48:50
·
answer #6
·
answered by notme 1
·
1⤊
0⤋
"He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
2006-11-05 03:50:24
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
Read his own lips:
"You know, one of the hardest parts of my job is to connect Iraq to the war on terror." --George W. Bush, interview with CBS News' Katie Couric, Sept. 6, 2006"
2006-11-05 03:49:19
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
I didn't know this. I agree with notme.
Why don't democrats admit they supported the war early on?
2006-11-05 03:50:51
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
it's called "revising history". they hope that the American public has a very short memory and will forget that they were duped into backing an unnecessary war ... unnecessary unless you hold major stock options in Halliburton and the Carlyle Group. the Military Industrial Complex war profiteers NEED wars to increase the profit margin.
2006-11-05 03:50:12
·
answer #10
·
answered by nebtet 6
·
1⤊
2⤋