We were never told there was a direct link to 9/11 but rather to the support of terrorist. I suppose you could take a convoluted position and say that since Bush said Iraq supported terrorism and terrorst attacked the United States then Iraq attacked the United States but that is not what I understood the issue to be, and I have never spoken with any conservative Republican who did think Saddam was behind 9/11. That was a smoke screen thrown up by the Democrats to try to make the Republicans look stupid. NO ONE IN THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION EVER MADE A DIRECT CONNECTION BETWEEN SADDAM HUSSAIN AND THE 9/11 HIJACKERS

Lemme see if I have this straight. If the Brits had a right to be there, doesn't that make our fight for independence illegal and immoral?

Thank you.

Illegal, more than likely, immoral, no

Bush stands by al Qaeda, Saddam link
Tuesday, June 15, 2004 Posted: 6:06 PM EDT (2206 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush repeated his administration's claim that Iraq was in league with al Qaeda under Saddam Hussein's rule, saying Tuesday that fugitive Islamic militant Abu Musab al-Zarqawi ties Saddam to the terrorist network.

"Zarqawi's the best evidence of a connection to al Qaeda affiliates and al Qaeda," Bush told reporters at the White House. "He's the person who's still killing."

U.S. intelligence officials have said al Qaeda had some links to Iraq dating back to the early 1990s, but the nature and extent of those contacts is a matter of dispute.

Critics have accused the president and other administration officials of falsely inflating the links between Iraq and al Qaeda in the months before the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq.

Vice President Dick Cheney, in a speech Monday in Florida, raised eyebrows by reasserting claims that Saddam "had long-established ties with al Qaeda."

Bush said Tuesday that Saddam also had ties to Palestinian militant groups and was making payments to the families of suicide bombers in Israel.

"We did the absolute right thing in removing him from power, and the world is better off with him not in power," he said.

Bush has tried to portray the war in Iraq as the "central front" in the war on terrorism that began with al Qaeda's September 11, 2001, attacks on New York and Washington.

In September, after Cheney asserted that Iraq had been "the geographic base of the terrorists who have had us under assault now for many years, but most especially on 9/11," Bush acknowledged there was no evidence that Saddam's government was connected to those attacks.

U.S. officials blame Zarqawi for a series of attacks on U.S. forces, Iraqi civilians and others since the American-led invasion of Iraq, including the April beheading of American businessman Nicholas Berg and the August 2003 bombing of U.N. headquarters in Baghdad.

Before the invasion, U.S. intelligence reports suggested Zarqawi had his leg amputated in a Baghdad hospital after being wounded fighting American forces in Afghanistan. The allegation was part of Secretary of State Colin Powell's presentation to the U.N. Security Council in February 2003, laying out the U.S. case for war.

But in April, a senior U.S. official said that report had been called into question: Zarqawi was still thought to have received medical treatment in Baghdad, but reports that he had his leg amputated appeared to have been incorrect, a U.S. official said.

Earlier this year, U.S. officials touted what they said was an intercepted letter from Zarqawi to al Qaeda leaders seeking their help in provoking a civil war in Iraq, where the U.S.-led occupation authority is scheduled to hand over power to an interim Iraqi government at month's end.

The principal reason cited for the coalition invasion was that Iraq was violating U.N. resolutions requiring it to give up chemical and biological weapons, long-range missiles and efforts to build a nuclear bomb. The U.N. did not give a final vote to approve the war but the U.S. pointed to previous resolutions that called for "serious consequences" if Iraq did not disarm.

Since then, inspectors have turned up some evidence of undeclared weapons research and two chemical artillery shells, but none of the stockpiles that Iraq was accused of maintaining.

A total of 833 U.S. troops have been killed in Iraq since the March 2003 invasion -- more than 500 of them in guerrilla attacks since Bush's May 1, 2003, declaration that "major combat" was over.

Bush acknowledged that creating a free society in Iraq is "hard work."

"But we'll get there," he said. "And we'll get there because people want to be free. That's why we'll get there. People long to live in freedom."

http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/06/15/bush.alqaeda/

Yes they won despite the odds being against them. After winning they wrote "The Articles of the Confederation". Those scoundrels were definitely insurgents. They resorted to dirty tricks to win against a fine military.

they wouldn't have an opertunity to defend themselves if we didn't overthrow saddam. If these so insurgents stoped fighting and let the political process go threw then we would of been out of there by now. Silly liberals

So how long do you plan to occupy Iraq?
Maybe if the Iraqis saw an end in sight they might be persuaeded to lay down their weapons

They actually wrote the Articles of Confederation six years before winning (1777).

I will agree that in the south there were guerilla forces on both sides that were not under direct military control of either side, and their motivation was a number of things, including plain old banditry. However, the American forces did defeat the British in pitched battles, particularly in the north, where the war was won. That could not be considered fighting dirty. Battles such as Trenton, Princeton, Saratoga, and Yorktown were won with generalship. Washington was simply very elusive and a better commander than anyone the British could field. After Saratoga and the entry of the French it was a matter of time before the British were defeated, and it was that battle that did it. The American proved that they could defeat the British in a battle of their respective armies.

IF YOUR PEOPLE REALIZED THAT IF THEY PUT DOWN THERE GUNS LONG ENOUGH WE WOULD LEAVE.