[phileysmiley]

Good morning, George. That question has been hotly debated here going back, in my memory at least, to the Watergate Hearings in 1973. "What did the President know and when did he know it?" As the man at the top, the President must take responsibility. Is he also at fault? Is he to blame for the actions of those under him? Well, certainly he was not aloof. He was very involved in the day to day decisions that led up to the war. He was part of a small, tightly woven group of like-minded individuals who disdained contrariness (See my post above on "Groupthink"). But, all too often, the government finds a scapegoat on whom they can place blame and thus be absolved of the responsibility. It remains to be seen what will be the outcome here.

[johnliscomb]

>>When it comes to war planning and sending thousands of soldiers for a joyride to Iraq then it IS a crime not to be able to fortell , not the future , but how this war will turn out. How come those C. Intelligence A. could have plenty of info about WMD and not about the possible ressistance , the real army of Saddam and what the Iraqi people really want in order to start - a procedure called in the army - psychological war - that includes propaganda , friendly to the public messages and even brain wash and some short of lies - which assures an Army Leader that his men will not be more harmed than the minimum.<<

Perhaps we should expect him to pick our lucky lotto numbers as well?

You can have the best planners and strategists in the world but that doesn't mean they can quantify the most unpredictable element of all. HUMANS.

[foxtrot6]

Saddam had WMD, it is in other countries now. Also the Russians warned us before the war that Saddam was planning attacks on the U.S. Even if most of the intellegence was screwed up and wrong, he was still letting terrorists use his country as a safe haven.

[OsirisX]

Yes Saddam HAD WMD, but for all we know they may all have been destoyed. And why Iraq? There were plenty of othe contries providing safehavens for terrorists.

[johnliscomb]

Also it has come out but not well publicised in the press a place called Salman Pak. This was a terrorist training camp in Iraq that had airplanes, busses and trains that were used to teach hijacking terroist techniques.

Sabah Khodada, a former captain in the Iraqi army and later an intelligence officer. His first reaction, on hearing of 9/11, was that "this operation was conducted by people who were trained by Saddam." The hijackers had skills that required practice and that wasn't available in the hills of Afghistan. It was available at Salman Pak.

The critical points here are: 1) just because Saddam and Osama didn't see eye to eye does not mean they couldn't coordinate on matters of joint interest; and 2) if Saddam didn't team up with al Qaeda, he was showing a very unhealthy interest in terrorism in his own right.

page 137-138 Micheal Moore is a Big Fat Stupid White Man

[Kril'ya]

Well, just as one has to take what Michael Moore says with a grain of salt, a title like that would probably lead me to believe that that book is really no more objective.

[johnliscomb]

Everything is documented and i find it rather nice that someone has taken it upon himself to point the light of truth on that lying weasel.

Don't let the title fool you.

[kanaloa]

So you don't think the author is biased? Please John, give me a break.

[johnliscomb]

I think there is bias there but at the same time the facts presented will stand up to scrutiny.

No one can the same about MM.

[kanaloa]

I haven't seen his movie yet either... and I will likely take it with a grain of salt when I do. I am someone who likes to figure it out myself... or at least get the know how on how the conclusion was made.

For someone to go and write a book about their dislike for MM though, makes me think they have as much a bias as he does to start. Your biasing bias, LOL