David~this is a very fine article. I agree with many of your points here. As far as my own take on Bush, etc.~I've aready stated and restated that in several of my previous blogs here. I do like how your mind works. You almost seem like a more intellectual version of myself! . I'm afraid I'm more of the artist type. So I wrote a few rather intense poems about the Twin Towers, and read those at a hushed reading or two. Nobody actually insulted me~which was nice. Because I think most of this could have been avoided (IMO). But I am only a poet, huh? So I won't pretend to know more than the majority. Thanks for writing this one. Totally glad I finally got to read some of your stuff! (I am unclear though? This was published somewhere else first? And you are the author then?) In any case, keep on blogging big time!

~MP

P.S. Did you get to see the comments I left for you on my Burning Down Our Own JU House blog? I mean, the only way to check that one out now is to go directly to my JU blog site, etc. It's no longer in the forums...

David:
Well, the neocons will say it's Canadian so it's irrelevant. But to me, it's indicative of most of the world's opinion. Thanks!

You realize that there were also 66 pages in the senate report about Hussein's links to terrorism, right? You are also aware that he was involved in a Sudanese chemical weapons plant that was also vistited by bin Laden, and for that reason Clinton hit it with a missile strike.

I've yet to see anyone write an article like this who has acutally read the senate intelligence committee report. This is just the same rehashed news. I think in light of many things that I am hearing coming out of that report it is at least debateable that Hussein was a threat. Another point oft forgotten is the fact that the sanctions were ten years old and were weakening every year. The French, Russians, and Chinese had billions in military contracts at stake and the US wouldn't have been able to keep sanctions in place forever.

And, a bit more realistically, how long did the war last? We are approaching the election, and Iraq is not "finished". What if Bush had waited another year for approval, or even six months. He would have been going into an election in the middle of a war, something that would have obviously been called an election year tactic.

So the US now accepts that the Al Shifa factory did NOT make chemical weapons and had NO links to Iraq.

Reference? Not disputing you, just reserving judgement.

When Canada gets to vote in US elections then I'll care what Canada thinks.