Are you mad that Bush took America to War for false reasons?? If so or If not, why???

djgriffinny... hahaha... don't worry about darfur and all the people that die there... don't worry about China and how we support their human rights violations... only worry about the bad guys we want you to worry about... nice job only looking where the government wants you too while crimes 10 times more horrific are occurring

First Bush never did lie who ever keeps saying that is just a idiot.

2nd we still don't know if Iraq has WMD's we may still find out that that do or did.

3rd Bush gave many reasons to goto war not just the WMD's like takeing a mad man out of power and freeing a Courtry. You guys should really look into what Iraq was like befor the war. I think then you would get a different pitcher of the war in Iraq and why we went over there.

yes, i have been following the Plame-gate thing ever since 2003, read Wilson's book, read and heard interviews from David Kay and ex CIA people like Karen Kwiatowski, etc., and it has been extremely frustrating to see such efforts as the Conyer's effort struggling to gain ground and the media's horrible failure to provide investigative journalism on this.

But now that there is a federal investigation on the CIA Leak and surrounding actions by the white house, this story is gaining momentum, and i am hearing great news every week. Rove, who very well may have orchestrated or played a major role in the discrediting of Wilson, is supposed to be indicted this week, Cheney's notes are now under scrutiny, and recently it was revealed that the white house had overwhelming knowledge of the actual function of the so-called biological weapons labs. Slowly but surely the mainstream media is piecing this entire picture together, and it is only a matter of time until the whole thing become the biggest investigation hearing we have ever seen in this country. It will no-doubt be bigger than Watergate, and way bigger than Iran-Contra. Keep in mind what is going to be brought to this trial is the allegation that the adminstration falsified intelligence in order to go to war -- this is huge.

If you are that upset about it, I urge you to take action to write your congress person and bring a full investigation on the matter. Keep in mind Fitzgerald's jurisdiction may perhaps be limited to just the CIA-Leak, not the bigger scandal behind that story, which is the falsification of intel to make the case for war -- what Wilson's op-ed presented evidence of, and what started the entire CIA-Leak to begin with. This story is far more important, and deserves a fair hearing. You can help by taking action, and I hope you can divert your emotion in this direction.

WWII had Hitler, the US stood by as Hitler systematically killed people for no reason.

Not let us think what Saddam was doing? He is not any better then Hitler. May WMD was the big reason, but human rights is big too.

If you lived under Saddam do you think you would be able to criticize him and not worry about your back. I don't think so.

I remember 2001. We can not sit back and let terrorism happen. 2001 was the straw that broke the proverbial camel's back, we have been victims of terrorism for far too long.

Unfortunately, we have become the world's enforcers and no matter what we do is wrong. I, personally, am pretty tired of hearing people complain about how awful american's are, but no one says hey we don't need your help when a disaster strikes do they?

Grow up. Learn some history instead of asking questions like this!

Congress authorized the use of military force in Afghanistan and Iraq. Bush just botched the job of being Commander-in-Chief once force was authorized.

I'm not mad at Bush for being incompetent at his job. Yes, he presented misinformation. But that's politics. And it was only done to justify the action in the eyes of the American people, who really had no say in the decision making. So, while it may have been fraud and misrepresentation, it wasn't material because the decision to go or stay wasn't up to the American people.

I am annoyed, however, at the percentage of the population that doesn't think Bush should be on trial (via a process called impeachment) for blatant and deliberate violations of federal law and betrayal of his oath of office. But that's a different rant.

Then you better blame everyone else in the world. It is a historical fact that he had them to gas the Kurds in his own country and used them in the war with Iran. Now, intell around the world said he had them.

Plus, you are not accurate. This war was a continuation of the first Gulf War because Saddam violated all the UN resolutions. Tell me you don't think we would be better off with him still in power? He was not contained like liberals think he was. He was paying terrorists to go into Israel and bomb civilians.

Remember what was said after 9/11? If you support a terrorist of harbor a terrorist you're a terrorist! Saddam Hussein is a terrorist.

I am more mad at AL GORE who went to Saudi Arabia and lied saying Muslims were "abused" in this country after 9/11. Then JOHN KERRY said our troops were terrorizing Iraqi women and children.

Toby Keith said:

I consider myself a conservative democrat and I am often embarrassed for my party. George W. got my endorsement and I performed for him the night before his re-election, because he asked me to. He's got the toughest job on the planet and I will support my president

Well, I think taking Saddam out was the right thing to do. Everyone knows that WMD was Saddam's life-long ambition. If Bush had NOT taken him out, everyone would have given him hell about that. I concluded a long time ago that in the eyes of many very narrow-minded people, that Bush, no matter what he does, can do no right. I think that is a shame.

simply by the indisputable fact that's a partisan list with partisan findings. there have been different comments which have come out which have said the alternative, yet it truly is not any longer said on. that's in straightforward words a sport that's performed via politicians. in case you'll swallow each little thing that helps your aspect of view and overlook about something that's adverse to it, you'll have an extremely disappointing life. Yea, we would have dealt with the warfare extra helpful, yet became it totally on trees shoulders, supply me a ruin. Kerry became on the intelligence committee, he had get admission to to an analogous data as did all the different contributors. The Democrats are only as implicit contained in the screw up as Bush and the Republicans, yet saying 'oops we screwed up too' does no longer win elections. So blame it on the republicans and we can win. that's all politics, be it Democrat or Republican there important issue isn't the rustic, their important issue is preserving their job, and how in which to do that's to discover someone or something to position the blame on. i'm prepared to wager that in spite of what the Democrats say there'll not in any respect be any costs further adverse to Bush or Chaney. he's out of place of work in below a three hundred and sixty 5 days and could be a footnote after that. Time to bypass on. McCain 08 - the only which quite knows what it ability to be at warfare.

Of course George Bush lies about everything. Haliburton and Carlyle have gotten rich from American Iraqi rebuilding funds. The oil fields and pipeline to the Indian Ocean was the Republicans only concern, Bush will keep troops in Iraq as long as he can to protect his interest of the oil Companies.

i kind of agree with the first persons answer. at least your being informed now than never. There is always a bottom line for going to war, and that bottom line is "what's in it for me, or us"? that's what you have to sift through, there is a multitude of information with a bias attached. Get both sides of the perspective before you make up your mind. Don't believe the first thing your hear, see, or read, do some checking... the truth always comes out in the end. Come election time your vote will not be wasted because you have checked the facts. Politicians are actors, that's what they are paid to do.

ONE of the reasons was WMD's, and everybody - Democrats, UN, Russia, France - thought they had them. He played shell games for so long with the inspectors that they could be anywhere - Syria, buried in the desert, or gone. How could you lie about something that you and everybody else thought was true? It's not lying. And I'll tell you what - I'd rather be fighting with and killing those fleabags over there than over here! And what "other things" has he "lied" about? I'll be willing to listen, but put up some proof - it's easy to call people liars. It's not as easy to prove it.