analog

You continue to ignore direct questions to your direct statements. I cannot debate against the same blind rhetoric in every single post.

Saying they "thought" they were there is one thing, and now you're saying that the methods aren't perfect, etc. Again, I ask, if you aren't now admitting that there were no WMD's, what are you saying? You allude to the possibility and when called on it, you give me more fluff, not a response.

We've debated this for 4 pages now. I am not the only one who has made a case against the "small amount" (your own words) of WMD's found as being completely impotent of use, and worthless as evidence upon which to build a case for war. WMD's were always the main selling point to us, the American people and, indeed, the world. I love the "well if Bush is a liar then the other 60 coalition countries are lying too!" bullshit. Finger-pointing and diverting attention at its best- not to mention another non-answer.

This thread is about WMD's- not whether we should have gone to war over all of Saddam's exploits. You can prattle on about funding Israeli suicide bombers (you had to reach to pull that one out, i'm sure), torture and rape, etc., etc., etc., all you want, but many things remain directly questioned by me (and others), and thoroughly ignored by you.