<HTML><FONT FACE=arial,helvetica><HTML><FONT SIZE=2 PTSIZE=10 FAMILY="SANSSERIF" FACE="Arial" LANG="0"><BR>
Joan wrote:<BR>
<BR>
"Let's not get confused. These aren't my arguments, Ted; they're John Kerry's. I would not have voted to grant Bush the authority to use force"<BR>
<BR>
I understood this but I took your arguments to be some sort of defense of Kerry's position. I guess you were attempting to make bad logic based on false information seem sensible? That's how I would characterize the decision by the US Congress to give Bush support for the invasion of Iraq.<BR>
<BR>
False information: the Iraq threat to the US: Saddam Hussein represented less of a threat to the US than the funding for Al Quada coming from Saudi Arabia. There were no calls from W. Bush or the US Congress for the Saudi totalitarian dictators to give up the people who fund Al Quada or we will bomb them.<BR>
<BR>
Joan wrote:<BR>
<BR>
"Who knew that Bush would make such a hash of Iraq? Some guessed; most didn't have a clue."<BR>
<BR>
Bad logic: many people knew Iraq would be a mess to invade and attempt to turn into a "Democracy." This was an easy prediction. I would not call it a "guess." Based on the ethnic, religious, economic and political situation of that region, and internally to Iraq, I think any sober and thorough analysis of the US goals in invading Iraq would warn of a long bloody struggle with slim chances of success.<BR>
<BR>
Ted Moffett<BR>
<BR>
</FONT></HTML>