Since this topic is already in the fire I'll just throw some more wood on.
Here's a view on the S of the U from outside the US:
Bush Act Starts To Wear Thin He's very anti bush but raises some good points.
For example:
He posited the invasion of Iraq as a war of liberation. But that was never his chief stated aim. It was to neutralize the direct danger posed to the U.S. by the Iraqi weapons of mass destruction.
Those weapons — anthrax, botulin, nerve agents and nukes from Niger, so dramatically and graphically illustrated in last year's State of the Union address — have now cleverly been downgraded to "weapons of mass destruction-related program activities." (my italics).
Who going to be the first extremist to prove their racism by declareing the whole article void because the writer has an Arab name?
Previous Topic
Index
