From the horse's mouth. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/04/06/the_skinny/main2655600.shtml "A declassified Pentagon report released Thursday concludes that there was no direct cooperation between Saddam Hussein's regime and al Qeada. But Dick Cheney, apparently, remains convinced there was."
But there was a link 100% for sure, FOX News said there was. I am sure the crazy gang will keep insisting there was, just like they keep insisting on believing the massive WMD lie that got us into this disasterous mess in the first place.
I put a video of George Bush admitting that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, and was told essentially that he was just talking about nukes So I think this will be met with a similar response. I.e., some rationalization. I await the entertainment
Only the devoted 'Bushies' in America still think the invasion of Iraq has some punative link to 9/11. The only place Bush can make speaches now is at the whitehouse or military locations. Poor old Cheney is only welcome on the Rush Limbaugh show. Mitt Romney for President 2008 just because he is a "lifetime hunter" Is this all it takes to get the Republican nomination?
Check this out since dumbass O-Reilly came up. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0nD_iNPalY&mode=related&search= Listen in the very end what Dave says. Just AWESOME!!! In yo face mothefucka!!!!
LMAO...here is a solution to end the war in Iraq that some brilliant mind on Youtube came up with: "Here's how we win in Iraq: we get Mikey J. Fox to loan us the Delorean between stem cell commercials, go back in time, and stop the Iraq war from starting! Maybe we could just shock Sadam with 1.21 jigowatts. That's do it."
Anyone see O'Drooly with Geraldo? I thought he was going to have a hearth attack - he went completely insane
That is because he is completely insane. He has to be the biggest lunatic on mainstream news media television in the USA, I haven't seen anyone else that comes close.
DIRECTLY or INDIRECTLY, action needed to be taken against Iraq for more reasons that just one. Now quit being ignorant.
And they have Nukes and the US doesnt attack a country with nukes, since Iraq didn't have any, and they damn well knew it, they were bombed. Lets hope Iran does have them and another war is avoided.
Like what? Democracy? Being a tough dictator on Iraqis? more than a 100,000 innocent Iraqis dead for this!
When the specific reason a war was started turns out to be unfounded, it is regrettable: "Mistakes were made" And its natural to come up with 'other' reasons to justify the mistake, especially if the bombs and bullets aren't near you.
The invasion of Iraq totally validated the rationale behind the nuclear arms race. How disturbingly ironic. Maybe the Red Cross should donate nukes to countries to prevent a foreign invasion
There is a difference between a link(s) and "direct cooperation." There were many links, all previously covered with sources. One souce, based on a "summary" report does not outrump other solid sources. Just because there are some here who sympathize with and defend the actions of terrorists as "the good guys," doesn't discount evidence, nor do misleading thread titles that are not honest in describing the content. BTW, AGS, your wmd are here. No way to absolve your buds on this one.
That's unfortunate - but it's better than 100 MILLION dead Americans if terrorists ever got nuclear weapons! If I was an Iraqi right now and I know firmly what I know now as strongly as I do, then I would feel the SAME WAY about the war. I agree mistakes were made, however this WAR as a whole, is not one of them. Rather, it IS natural to try to come up with reasons to attack America to UN-justify the action, especially since the bombs and bullets aren't in your neighborhood. You're sitting at home, so comfortably, saying "Aw - people are dying. We need to stop this bleepin' war! Yeah... I hate America! Death to George Bush! ... now where's that remote at ..." That's actually not a bad idea...