Originally Posted by pomeroo
Ahh! So it is that the CT transends politics. Let me tell you this, if BUSH and co had been impeached and tried for the war or 9/11, I can GUARANTEE the truthers would be satisfied, and would not say that the DEMS are in on the whole thing. Now, however, it looks like BUSH etal will be out in 2008, so in order to continue on looking for someone to hang, and knowing the REPS will fall from the limelight, they have to encorporate the DEMS into it now...very pathetic.
As for the premise that they have to keep OBL around, well then why did they capture Saddam? Wasnt he better left alive and hiding, so that they could continue to stay in Iraq forever, to insure he didnt come back into power the minute they left?
What about the head Al-Qaeda guy in Iraq. They killed him (Blew him up I believe). Wouldnt they have been better off letting him continue to create havoc in Iraq, so they would have to maintain a presence there?
This is where your rational falls short ACE.
While this part is not related to the conundrum, I would say it is equally silly. The fact is that BUSH and cronies destroyed their careers, and their legacies with the Iraq War. They also destroyed their chance to maintain power. If they had have planted the WMDs, which would have been very EASY to do, the war would still be seen as needed, and the ratings would still be good, and the chances of the REPS maintaining power through this FEAR would have been VERY VERY GOOD. Yet they did not. Your suggestion that their desire for personal success, maintenance of power, and legacy, was superceded by creating a precedent is just STUPID.
Thats all I gotta say for now.