Total Pageviews

Monday, April 30, 2007

I wrote a while back about how the conflict in Iraq qas spurred by a knee-jerk reaction to the Trade Centre attacks. I have repeated this opinion several times and for the most part it has fallen on deaf ears.
Well, it now transpires that George Dubya, made that particular decision within one day of the attack. He was quoted as saying that "Iraq deserves to shoulder some of the responsibilty for the attacks". At the time (and currently for that matter) there was , nor has there been since despite the US's puppet inspectors best efforts to uncover, no evidence to suggest any connection between the Middle-Eastern country and the attacks save for the shared religion.
Could this just be a continuation of Bush senior's attempt to control that uncontrollable land? A family affair as it were?

It's been quite a price for keeping something in the family. The man would put you in mind of a mad sientist, drunk on his unfettered power.

Who's the bigger terrorist?

3 comments:

Unknown said...

Testing

Unknown said...

As Bush is a "puppet" president it must be his advisors who should shoulder the blame for the current situation. The man has not had an original idea in his head since day one of his presidency. His "victory"for a second term was suspect from the beginning so as it did not have a secure foundation --how can he or his advisors have a secure policy.

Of course "puppet no.2" i.e. Blair
is also paying for his blind faith in this decision.

mutters said...

You're right about the original thought part but I'm not sure it wasn't Bush's doing alone. Maybe to try to finish the job his father started in '91?

Whomever's responsible, it may well go down as the most objected war in history - though I'm too young to remember Vietnam (America's other sore point) but I'm aware of the furore surrounding it.