That was the first one. All the others were given when each one in turn was
proven false. He ended up using the lamest after they all
failed-humanitarian. Not a lame reason in itself, but lame in that it was
the only possible one left to him and it applies so much more in other parts
of the world that just don't happen to be oil rich.

Do they still let you push tin?

mike regish

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote in message
nk.net...

"mike regish" wrote in message
news:AY%pd.572727$mD.93066@attbi_s02...

Didn't think your narrow mind could wrap itself around more than one
thing at a time. Since I never said anything about his other reasons, it
is impossible to make the conclusion you have jumped to without using
seriously flawed reasoning, but that is exactly what I would expect from
you, or any Bushie, for that matter.


Since the question was which of the reasons given for invading Iraq were
wrong, and you mentioned only WMD, it is logical to conclude you believe
the other reasons were right.