777 fixer said:
You mean the 53 pre-1991 munitions that included inert mustard gas that was of no use offensively? Is this what 4000+ Americans and over 100,000 Iraqi's died for? Along with billions of dollar spent on it?
delldude said:
You claimed there were no WMD's....now you're changing the facts? LOL
777 fixer said:
Fifty some odd rounds of useless/inert munitions is hardly the vast WMD program that was claimed Saddam possessed. All that death and destruction for that? Seems like heavy price to pay for something that was of no threat. Unless of course you cracked open the casings and drank it.
777 fixer said:
That would be the Bush Administration that cherry picked information that suited them and ignored information that did not. And as we all know in the end it was his decision so mentioning congress or other world leaders is rather pointless.
GIBSON: You've always said there's no do-overs as President. If you had one?
BUSH: I don't know -- the biggest regret of all the presidency has to have been the intelligence failure in Iraq. A lot of people put their reputations on the line and said the weapons of mass destruction is a reason to remove Saddam Hussein. It wasn't just people in my administration; a lot of members in Congress, prior to my arrival in Washington D.C., during the debate on Iraq, a lot of leaders of nations around the world were all looking at the same intelligence. And, you know, that's not a do-over, but I wish the intelligence had been different, I guess.
GIBSON: If the intelligence had been right, would there have been an Iraq war?
BUSH: Yes, because Saddam Hussein was unwilling to let the inspectors go in to determine whether or not the U.N. resolutions were being upheld. In other words, if he had had weapons of mass destruction, would there have been a war? Absolutely.
Now that is funny.eolesen said:Not someone I'd imagine wearing white, but blue was out of the question.