how can you say the war is successfull?
Funny how none of that would need to be done if we hadn't overthrown them in the first place. Most of the Iraqi people believe they were better off under Saddams rule. So....maybe its successfull in our eyes as americans, we are not effected by the problems, but it DOES effect the Iraqi's lives directly. You still haven't answered any questions or given any evidence....you just give your opinions and use terms like probably to support your arguement. Your entire case is 100% speculation.

Actually why don't you go to the New York times site, or search the cable news sites....you'll be sadly disapointed to find nearly 99.9% came from other sources, so that kinda shoots down your "liberal media" defense

Seems your missing/ avoiding the point. I wasn't comparing Clinton's lying about a blow job and bush lying about weapons of mass destruction. Now...answer this straight up. WHICH IS MORE IMPORTANT, Investigating a blow job or investigated terrorists in flight schools? There, the question is in bold for you...maybe you'll see it this time.

Now I'll talk about the blow job. Why did whether he got a blow job or not matter? I mean, Did there REALLY need to be an investigation into whether he got one or not? How did this effect your life...or my life...or anyone one except Him, and his family? Was it a risk to national security? The fact is it really didn't matter. It never effected any other Americans. Where as, launching a unjust war on a country, without solid evidence (which there is no argueing this war was unjust. By military standards for a pre-emptive war to be just there has to be a clear and present danger. Well here we are 6 months later without WMD so the threat obviously wasn't clear and certainly not present.) does effect Americans. Too many Americans have lost their lives fighting in war that was called "immediatley necissary to the safety of Americans" and now the entire reason for the war has still not been found. And even worse, is widely believed (even by the intelligence community) that put us in even more danger.

Give me a break, the president wasn't duped, he had been told by both the CIA and the FBI that the intelligence wasn't completely accurate, and they told him that attacking Iraq could put us in more danger. Thats certainly not the message he tried to convey to the american people. Because all you right wing nuts were 100% possitive he had the weapons before the war, and now they still have not found. The congressmen weren't duped either, they didn't say "lets go to war now" many of them gave the go ahead because they thought there would be more verification of the intelligence and alliance building if war was necissary. Our administration needed our fear of Iraq, could you imagine the protests if everyone thought Iraq was not a threat? Intentional or not, congress gave the approval for Bush to wage war based on FALSE information. As for the WMD. We have no evidence... in our legal system you need a preponderance of evidence at the very least. We are the accusers. This has been the complaint of the international community. We sent people into Iraq to find evidence (inspectors)... any evidence.. and while still searching for evidence the US decides 'Well we don't need any evidence'. What is that? If we were so right about this war why was our alliance so small, and where are the weapons? Obviously most of the world believed Iraq was not a threat, and these are the countries that could have been directly within range of saddams weapons (if they existed). The political/economic reasons for the war are there. You seem to be completely unconcerned with President Bush's motivation as you are with the result. AMERICANS ARE DYING EVERYDAY, over a war we have NO PROOF was necissary. There is no justification for it.