Dedalus,
I think you are on to something.
This is not a liberal vs consertative issue. Anyone that flat out supports any War because of what they hear from a conservative Republican or a Liberal Democrate is a FOOL.
Suddam has blown off his responsibilities for over 11 years, 2 of those years during Bush's administration and 8 years during Clintons. Suddam is not anymore a threat than he was 11 plus years ago. Why is it now time to play hard ball? During those 11 plus years Suddam has never been accused of a terroistic attack on the US. We know he has weapons of mass distruction because we sold them to him. Does everyone forget what Daddy Bush did in the 80's to get hostages freed. Ask Oliver North! Why now is it time to disarm him? Why wasn't disarming Suddam one if Bush's campaign issues? Suddam was doing the same things then that he is doing now. What has changed?
Bush has done a good job connecting 9/11 with Iraq dispite no such proof that Iraq was involved with 9/11. If anyone thought Iraq was remotely responsible for 9/11 we would have attack them immediately along with Afghanistan. Bush needed to connect 9/11 with Iraq because our Military is doing such a good job against the terriost of 9/11 that tensions in America was easing. Bush needs conflict to keep Americains focussed away from the things he has shown he can not fix or wants to deal with. Korea and our economy.
It seems that Son Bush picked up where Daddy Bush left of when it comes to our ecconomy. I remember Bush campaigning on an ecconomic platform. Tax cuts, tax rebates, ecconomic stimulus package. How has that worked? Most have forgotten the tax reabate we all got last year. Why doesn't anyone ask Bush about his ecconomic stimulus pakage and how it is not working. No one is thinking to ask about the economy or tax cuts because Bush has everyone focus on the impending War with Iraq. What about Korea who continues to experiment with nukes? Korea is a hell of a lot closer to having a weapon of mass distruction that could reach the west coast of the US and we have no idea how close they are. Unlike Iraq, we did not sell the weapon to the Koreans.
I am not completely anti Bush. He did handle the response to 9/11 perfectly. I believe if we need to go to War he would be a better leader than Clinton or Gore would of been. At this point no one in the world except for Bush and a few close friends thinks we should attack Iraq. The British are somewhat behind us but not completely. We can, and probably will, destroy Suddam and his supporters, but I wonder at what cost. Do we think that China and Russia is going to sit by while the US takes control of the Middle East. We already control Afghanistan, we take Iraq we have half of the region. What about the terriost who will use an attack on Iraq as fuel for thier derranged view on the US.
An attack on Iraq has nothing to do with disarming. If disarming Suddam was such a concern to the US it would not have taken 11 plus years to draw a line in the sand. The US knows what Iraq has and we have the technology and know how to make what ever they have obsolete. Iraq is not a threat to the US and Bush knows it. Our CIA can take Suddam out at any time amd could have over the last 11 years, but how would it look if the US went arround and openly assassinated leaders it did not like? Bush wants Suddam and Iraq because they are an easy target.
My view is not a liberal view or a consertative one. To label everyone that protest a war with Iraq a liberal and to say everyone that supports the war is a consertative is an easy way out of having to think through this issue completly. Why would anyone think that this issue fits so neatly as consertative vs Liberal.
I am one that believes at this point WAR with Iraq is not the answer. The US has more pressing issues than a surrounded, grounded, disfuctional crazy man and Bush knows it but he not telling.