>There was no evidence they didn't and every reason at that time (including Saddam's own reasons for letting it be thought) to think that there were. Sheesh Walter, you are beating a dead horse and it accomplishes nothing for the Iraqi people. Where are the posts from you with recommendations on what the U.S. should do now for the Iraqi people instead of focusing constantly on what they shouldn't have done in the past???? It's like an album skipping...or a parrot that keeps repeating the same phrase over and over again.

But... what *IF* the single REAL reason was to ensure that the USD continued to be the global currency? Wouldn't everything else just be marketing the war to the people?



>
>
>>>Re-writing history now Walter? Your statement is not accurate.
>>>
>>>Iraq has not supplied all the information sought by inspectors about when and how it destroyed previous stocks of chemical and biological weapons, built up during the 1980s with assistance from the United States and European countries, Blix said. It was impossible as yet to prove conclusively that all these weapons had been destroyed.
>>>
>>>“One must not jump to the conclusion that they exist,” Blix said. “However, that possibility is also not excluded.”
>>>
>>>Blix, 15 February 2003
>>
>>So..... ?? Isn't that exactly what I meant here? The conclusion was that there is no evidence that they existed. Please don't bend the argument.
>>
>>It does not really matter. To me, the US was determined to invade iraq irregardless the evidence. And that was because there was a more compelling (but harder to sell) argument to start the war. Now before you start acusing me again from anti-americanism... This stance is supported my the majority of americans as well.