__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

I've watched this situation carefully for 25 years. The only thing I can say is that to see the connection you have to put the details together into the big picture. I am not a Republican and I am not an idealogue. I am a moderate, just one of the average people in the middle that helps decide the direction this country goes at every Presidential election. I'm sure you must realize it is the 25% of us in the middle that decides things, eh?

We are infidels to Islam, at least radical Islam, so we must die. For many years the Iraqi gov't has been giving families large sums of money when a family member martyrs themselves in a suicide attack. That is not state sponsorship of terrorism? Iraq has been giving asylum to members of major terrorist groups, giving them land for terrorist training grounds, and allowing ringleaders access to the higest levels of Iraqi gov't. Terrorism is a network, and the first countries that pop out of my mind are Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Oman, Libya, Yemen, the Sudan, and Syria. Look at the rhetoric and methodology of Saddam when he ran Iraq. These guys were absolutely hard core radicals. If it looks like a rat, smells like a rat, and squeals like a rat, I'm betting it IS a rat. I don't mind different opinions one bit. What I do mind is those who are willing to say with absolute certainty that their opinions are 100% correct, particularly when their opinions are authored by some "pundit".

War on terror in IRaq.. My A$$

http://abcnews.go.com/wire/Politics/ap20040320_741.html

It IS a political war based on reasons NOT linked to terrorism. Now it has made the world a more dangerous place and been a source of recruitment for terrorists and given them further "justification". The Iraq war has not helped. Yes, the Afganistan war did and we are not doing enough now to fight terrorism because all our resources are tied up in Iraq.

Some of you can try to claim it is in the past, or ignore it, or justify it, but it is very relevent to if President Bush should be re-elected...that makes it relevent.

Most if not all of the middle east have been committing terrorist acts on either each other or a different country since the beginning of time. If you believe that there is not one terrorist in Iraq or never has been you ARE VERY wrong. You are believing what the liberals are telling you and need to think for your self and quit putting up links of someone else's opinion. Iraq has attracted 4 different countries in the last 50 years,YES IRAQ, have you ever read a second graders book in Iraq? It tells them that if you do not believe in Islam that death is deserved in the most horrible ways. It go's on to let an 8 year old child believe it is th right thing to do to destroy any whom think different"INFIDELS" you , me and anyone else that does not follow the teachings of Mohamed. This just didn't start 2 years ago, it's been going on for thousands of years. Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Turkey, India and Israel have all had and used terrorist tactics , as has the Untied States "Nagasaki, Hiroshima . The difference here is that the majority of these counties now consider this to be barbaric that is accept for Iraq. Do you think the terrorist training camps in Iraq built them selfs? I'm sure you know over 200 were found ...by the UN. I'm sure you also know that the no fly zone was also put in to effect to prevent the REBUILDING of more terrorist camps in southern Iraq. To believe that Iraq has nothing to do with terrorism is ,in my view , to ignore the past, present and future.

Hard Driver, are you saying it's not linked to terrorism just because you say so? Because some liberal rag, website, or news network says so? I have no agenda and I say it IS linked to terrorism. I don't mind that we disagree, but I do mind that you seem to be saying you have a pipeline to the truth I don't have. Your opinions are only opinions, just like mine, just like anybody else's. OPINION...

ABC news has a decidedly liberal bias. Anyone can surf the net and find something that supports their views. It's infinitely harder to find an imparial site that supports you. Finding a source that says Iraq has (or had) nothing to do with the war on terror and it be an unbiased source is impossible. Of course, I may be wrong.

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

OK, I'm not gonna try to defend an argument that Iraq has no ties to terror. I'm sure there are ties. But, given that criteria for invading another sovereign nation, shouldn't we have gone into Saudi Arabia first? I see a hell of a lot more ties to the Saudis and terror. What gives? Are they really working so much more with us than Iraq was?

The Bush family has quite some profitable connects with the Saudi royal family. It's only due to American support that the royal family is still in power. As long it remains favorable for America to support the oppressive Saudi government it will stay in power. The same applies to Musharraf's Pakistan.

Really, the arguments justifying the invasion of Iraq are becoming more and more loose as they examined closer. Sure, I'm 99% sure Saddam still had WMDs at the time of the first threats, but he played his politics well, unlike Bush. Bush seemed way too much to be rushing towards Iraq, bypassing proper procedures, loosing much support. But oddest of all, half way through the campaign the war suddenly turns into liberating the Iraqis and not the WMDs.

WMDs? We're not here for them. We're here to liberate the Iraqis and help "them" establish their own pro-US democracy.

...
For the record, I agree Saddam had to go, but the procedure for the war was completely wrong.

Is too...

__________________
The last time this country mixed politics with religion, people got burned at the stake.