>No offense to you Mark. The following are some of my views on a bit of this topic.
>
>My recollections are different. One of the reasons for going into Iraq was WMD’s and its missile program. The administration stated that there was a direct link between Iraq and Al-Quida.

You are right about the administration's allegations of links to Al Qaeda. I got this mixed up with allegations of links to 9/11. The administration never made those allegations, although some believe they did.

However, the administration never claimed that Iraq was an "imminent" threat, as many have claimed they did. Bush's speech to the U.N. called Iraq a "grave and growing threat".

>As I recall different members of the administration gave different rationalizations as to why we went to war. The story changed even when coming from the same mouths.
>
>Just one report:
>
>http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=574&e=8&u=/nm/20040108/wl_nm/iraq_usa_weapons_dc
>
>Some reasons given for war included:
>
>"regime change"
>
>"disarmament of Iraq (WMD's)"
>
>"democracy"
>
>"Saving Iraqi lives"
>
>"link to Al-Quida"
>
>"Stablize the Arab world and Middle East"
>
>The list goes on...
>
>The story and rationalization for war with Iraq has changed often. Surely if enough reasons are given (who needs proof or reality?) the majority of “good Americans”, will accept one or more as compelling evidence as justification for our actions, regardless of whatever has occurred.

I think what still bothers me about this issue is that Iraq was given a final chance to comply with disarmament in U.N. Resolution 1441. The fact that they did not seems either to be over-looked or disagreed with. When the inspector himself, Hans Blix, states that Iraq clearly had not completely complied, I don't see how anyone can state that Iraq was complying. They were in breech of 1441.

Further, I have never heard a resonable alternative presented by anyone. One of the biggest arguments was let the inspections continue. This is just insane. There had been 12 years of defiance by Iraq. They virtually ignored every U.N. resolution, including 1441, until troops started massing on their border. Does anyone really think Iraq's behavior was going to change? Even with troops massing on their border, they still didn't fully comply.

One of my favorite definitions is the defintion of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result. The policy of the U.N. and those who put their faith in it in regards to Iraq is to me insanity. Iraq was not going to change.

>Also, I can recall just before we attacked Iraq, George W. Bush stating that, Saddam Hussein tried to kill his father.
>
>Anyone can believe whatever he or she wants. We are too quick to forget and when we experience any wrong doing from this administration we either overlook it or turn our backs.
>
>If you heard, quote and believe what you have heard on this subject you are a left wing liberal. If you do not have such views you are a “Real American”! All this crap reminds me of Vietnam - John Wayne and the “Love it or leave it group”!
>
>Will we expand the incident at Kent State when under a Republican Administration the National Guard was called in because the students protested against the bombing of Cambodia? Shoot any one who protests – that solves all problems.