Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: 10Bears on December 18, 2003, 12:05:26 AM
-
Kay requested the change for personal and family reasons, officials said. When he accepted the job in June, they said, he expected to quickly find the expansive evidence that the administration had claimed as its primary reason for going to war. Rather, Kay's preliminary report in October said the group had so far discovered only that Iraq was working to acquire chemical and biological weapons, had missile programs under various stages of development and possessed only a rudimentary nuclear program.
Opps
In an interview Tuesday night with President Bush, ABC correspondent Diane Sawyer asked why the administration stated as a "hard fact"[/color][/b] that Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had such weapons when it appears now he only had the intent to acquire them.
"So what's the difference?" Bush responded.
Mr. President ... um.. HuH?
heheh good article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A9823-2003Dec17.html)
-
the threat was sufficient imo and I approve completely of the steps taken to remove hussein once and for all from circulation.
-
You see... it all depends upon what your definition of "is" is.
-
There's a BIG difference.
As he'll find out if nothing is found.