sob

Hell, I saw those BEFORE any troops went over. The only difference was that you left out "quagmire."

I'm also getting bored with correcting people who misquote and misrepresent what I said. For the record, I opposed Mr Mephisto's characterization of Iraq as "a country that had no involvement with Al Queda."

So with credit to John Henke, whom I'm plagiarizing from because of a lack of interest in endlessly having to repeat what I ACTUALLY said, I'll submit the following:

Neither I nor the 9/11 Report are claiming that Iraq and Al Qaeda were engaged in an ongoing collaborative relationship. I merely point out that there was quite a history of mutual overtures, an apparent willingness to work together, and possible historic cooperation on chemical production/training.

I do not consider it relevant to the prewar calculation that Iraq was in an ongoing cooperative relationship with Al Qaeda. As Bush said, the danger from that relationship laid in the future.

I support the above statements in spite of the media-fueled opposing viewpoint: "Nope, no 'collaborative relationship' here. Move along. Bush lied."

I understand your position though. If you admit that Salman Pak was a terrorist training camp, it at least partially justifies our presence in Iraq.

And that would never do.

P.S. Has anyone told the Marines that the plane they blew up was "unsubstantiated?"