Exhaustive review sponsored by the Pentagon finds NO link between Saddam, al Qaida

champ76 said

Pretty harsh attack from an "Administrator."

DD is pointing out a valid point from a particular perspective many don't have. Why some people are resentful of his attempts to give insight to issues is beyond me. As to the subject at hand, when I first saw the thread, I was surprised because the military has found links between Saddam and AQ before, though not operational links. The links were published by the Army's counterterrorism center at WP, and when I have the chance, I'll find them for everyone. The continued exhaustive review of captured documents was an attempt to find operational links, which would be more damning against Saddam. None were found. So it's a story, just not the whole story, as DD pointed out.

Click to expand...

Wrong. First of all, there was no attack. Secondly, you're defending this untenous position for the same reason DD is: to rationalize somehow Bush's decision to invade.

Why am I resentful? Because I don't like my intelligence to be insulted. One. More. Time.

Again, this story underscores two FACTS:

1. The Bush administration either LIED or manipulated very poor evidence to link Hussein to Al-Queda.
2. There was no RATIONAL reason to invade Iraq based on at BEST the very, very tenous ties between Hussein and Al-Queda, if any at all existed.

But the partisan Republicans will continue to believe this pack of lies until the cows come home. Don't know why, but they will. Go back and read the speeches, press conferences, etc.

Bush, Cheney, etc. made DAILY connections between Hussein and Al-Queda to drum up support for the war. I personally think we were lied to and that's why I find it resentful and insulting to argue about some stupid Pentagon "meaning" of the word operation.

Terrible.