10-23-2013, 01:38 AM
|
#17
|
Valued Poster
Join Date: May 3, 2011
Location: Out of a suitcase
Posts: 6,233
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn
No, you can't change the subject. If the Huffington Post (right) says that it was about payback then all those democrats and protestors were wrong. They need to accept responsibility for their mistatements. Of course we had not reason to attack Hussein. After all, it wasn't like he violated the terms of the cease fire by going into the no fly zone or firing missiles at our planes, or putting mines in the Gulf to blow up our ships. It couldn't be because he "didn't" hold a US pilot for months after the cease fire. Do you think it was the plan to assassinate George H.W. Bush? Couldn't be that. Hussein was a real sweety wasn't he Eva.
|
Wrong again.
The Huffington Post reported what the book says. And you miss the point that few thought there were WMDs so they guessed according to available information. In my opinion, we would have looked less like assholes if those guesses would have been right.
If the reasons were as petty as claimed, all of our wounded, the people maimed and killed by IEDs, etc. were betrayed by their "leaders".
And it sure puts Bush landing on an aircraft carrier to a "Mission Accomplished" banner in a different light. Because he did accomplish his mission to kick ass. At our soldier's expense.
|
|
Quote
| 1 user liked this post
|