Reply #25: "I never defended Bush. Not once in this entire thread."

[ljm2002]

But you were first to accuse another of defending Saddam, who also "never defended Saddam, not once in the entire thread."

You're the one who tried to make the argument about Saddam, when it is not. That was never a stated reason for invading Iraq, not until after the fact. You probably believe that the staged takedown of Saddam's statue was cheered by a huge Iraqi crowd too.

In any case your arguments are specious. The war was based on lies. The death and destruction that have been a direct result of this criminal undertaking are on us -- specifically on Bush and his cronies, aided and abetted by an enabling Congress, some of whom supported anything Bush wanted to do, and others of whom were simply doormats and enablers attempting to protect their political hides while scuttling any semblance of principles.

No one here is unaware of the fact that Iraq is a divided country and has been since the British partitioned the Middle East 'way back when. So what? Even if you could justify our invasion under false pretenses of a country that was no threat to us and that had nothing to do with 9/11 (and you cannot) -- even if you could do that, it would not alter the fact that we had no plan for securing the country after the invasion, we attempted to occupy it with insufficient numbers of boots on the ground, we failed to guard the armories, etc., etc. ad infinitum -- Bush and cronies botched the job big time, and we and the Middle East are paying now and will pay for many years to come.