Congressional authorization of force was intended to be a way of getting Iraq to completely comply and we were only supposed to attack Iraq once a coalition was in place. War should always be the last resort and not predicated on flimsy evidence from someone like Chalibi who has ulterior motives.
----- Original Message -----
From: G
To: CF-Community
Sent: Tuesday, August 10, 2004 2:34 PM
Subject: Kerry would of gone to Iraq too?
http://www.boston.com/news/politics/president/articles/2004/08/10/kerry_says_hed_still_vote_to_authorize_iraq_war/
This story surprised me. Bush asked Kerry if, given what he knows now about faulty intelligence, if he still would of voted to give the President authority to attack Iraq.
Kerry said yes!
Kerry then went on to say that the planning and execution of the war we're faulty, including a muddy exit strategy, etc.
So...Kerry is implying it is the execution of the war that is at fault, not the fact that it exists in the first place? This seems confusing to me. Isn't the argument that Bush was wrong to attack Iraq, no matter what? Now Kerry's left open the possibility that HE might of attacked Iraq too, only he'd of done it better????
Help.......
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings] [Donations and Support]
