You can't argue with neo-cons when they have such selective memories...

[TXlib]

I sent a RW acquaintance of mine a link to the Reuters David Kay article, in which he says he believes Iraq never resumed large-scale WMD production after 1991.

My acquaintance's reply?

He said it didn't matter, as Iraqi WMDs weren't the main focus of our going to war.

I guess he doesn't (want to) remember *'s SotU address last year, or Powell's attempt to convince the UN of the grave threat posed by the Iraqi WMD program.

[Bertha Venation]

1. What does he say was the main focus

of "our" going to war?

[TXlib]

4. He spouts the party line

about removing a horrible dictator.

That may have been the outcome, but it certainly wasn't the reason given for going to war.

[Kellanved]

6. that is admitting a breach of international law

Removing a head of state is no legal basis for war.
And really bad news for Tony Blair btw - the UK ratified the ICC treaty after all.

[afraid_of_the_dark]

5. It was to get Saddam out of power...

to get him back for planning 9/11. Isn't that what they've been saying all along? :dunce:

[kalian]

2. The media brainwashing works....

sad, but true...

[GOPisEvil]

3. Neocons are incapable of forming their own opinions.

You should have sent the article after 11:00 CT, so your acquaintance would have received his opinion from St. Rush. :eyes:

[never cry wolf]

7. Send him this link

http://www.angelfire.com/creep/gwbush/remindus.html

In their own words!

:grr:

[zbdent]

8. Is this one of those guys who used the "argument-killing one-liner"

"How do you destroy something you never had?"

used by RW idjits after Saddam "promised" to destroy the WMDs.