Quote:
Originally posted by: MavKikiNYC
We know that <u>THERE HAD BEEN CONNECTIONS </u> and <u>THERE HAD BEEN EXCHANGES</u> between al Qaeda and the Saddam Hussein regime. And those have been pursued and looked at," Powell said on the program.
"But I have seen nothing that makes a <u>DIRECT</u> connection between Saddam Hussein and that awful regime, and what happened on 9/11."
He also said that he believed at the time that they had WMDs, and that even though no WMDs have been found (yet) , they have found evidence of weapons programs that would have allowed the Iraqis to proceed with the construction of WMDs had the Hussein regime not been deposed.
This non-story is just another desperate attempt by what's left of the Kerry campaign to divert some negative attention from Kerry's own sorry record on defense and anti-terrorism intelligence.
It amounts to little more than a death throe.
|
Let's get off the disasterous Kerry campaign a moment and focus on the war and what Colin Powell said. I'm interested in what you think and want to discuss this intelligently and in a civil manner.
>
We know that <u>THERE HAD BEEN CONNECTIONS </u> and <u>THERE HAD BEEN EXCHANGES</u> between al Qaeda and the Saddam Hussein regime. And those have been pursued and looked at," Powell said on the program.
"But I have seen nothing that makes a <u>DIRECT</u> connection between Saddam Hussein and that awful regime, and what happened on 9/11."
From my reading of this statement, it appears that Colin Powell now believes that there may have been a relationship between Saddam Hussein and Al-Qaeda in the past, but he doesen't think this was a strong enough connection to directly link Saddam Hussein to 9/11 and the War on Terror. We'll get to the oppressive regime and WMDs later. A reasonable inference from this reading would be; that a reasoning for an invasion of Iraq as being part of a greater war on terror was not justifiable. What is your thought on this?