Quote:
Originally posted by CaramonLS+Oct 11 2004, 04:10 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (CaramonLS @ Oct 11 2004, 04:10 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Displaced Flames fan@Oct 11 2004, 03:40 AM
This week marks the first time that the Bush administration has listed abuses in the oil-for-fuel program as an Iraq war rationale.
Might not be a legitimate rationale for the war, but it is certainly a major reason why the war happened in the first place.
|
pretty damned close dis. [/b][/quote]
No, for about the fifth time...it's not close at all. I'm getting tired of explaining it, but here it goes....one more time.
Look at the first part of my quote...."It might not be a legitimate rationale for going to war" just by reading that much it eliminates me as someone who has suggested what you guys are saying I suggested.
It's the second part that, for some reason that is a mystery to me, is so difficult for some to get a grasp on. That part is "but it is certainly a major reason why the war happened in the first place." This was to suggest, as previously explained, that Saddam knew he could play the governments of France and Russia in particular against the US.
Got it now?