HUGE amount of time had passed by between 1990-91 and 2003 when saddam had STILL NOT met his agreement with the UN that ended the war in the first place. So basically we were STILL at war with Iraq.
All that time where clinton himself had threatened to bomb Iraq. HE just didn't have the guts to take action....he, like most liberals are ALL TALK - no action.
No reason to give saddam another 13 years and especially not allow him to remain a threat AFTER 9-11.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And besides, as the anti-war folks continue to whine about our going in.....WE'RE THERE NOW. And the dems/liberals want us to ADMIT DEFEAT. That's THEIR way of dealing with anything - just QUIT - GIVE UP - run with your tail between your legs.
Burn the flag and act like cowards.
tsk tsk tsk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"While the democratic party complains about everything THIS President does to protect our Nation": "What would a Democrat president have done at that point?"
"Apparently, the answer is: Sit back and wait for the next terrorist attack."
posted on August 13, 2007 07:34:05 AM new
Thanks, Tom.
Cheney said 146 casualties meant it wasn't a cheap war and they took into account how many additional dead Americans was Saddam worth - and in their judgment it wasn't very many.
But now he was worth 3683 dead Americans plus about 30,000 wounded and it's still not enough?
