I did my homework before the war on the Terrorist thing- and there was NOTHING there.

What you're overlooking is, you did your research on information which was available to you and the rest of the world. The decision to act on assumption was based on intelligence gathered by U.S. and British agencies.

what research did YOU do on terrorist links?

Actually not a whole lot. I focused my “research” on WMD. The Oct 2002 CIA report on Iraqi came in handy as well as various reports and testimony by Bio and Chem weapons specialists. The minor details of Al Qaeda leadership showing up in Iraq after being flushed from Afghanistan and the “counter-terrorist” demonstrator passenger jet in the middle of nowhere is no cause for worry if you stick your head in the sand.

The assumption that Iraqi had WMD has not yet been proven wrong.(I know Davin, the burden of proof lays with us and before-the-fact, not after)

What has been proven wrong is the belief by us war mongers that the exact location of the WMD could not be divulged in order to protect the sources or reveal our capabilities. Some of us here wondered aloud why couldn't we tip the UN inspectors where to look. It appears we didn't know ourselves.

So, I have a wager for you. If no significant amounts* of WMD show up before the next election, I’ll vote for a Democrat. Conversely, If the evidence that we are all waiting for appears before then….YOU VOTE FOR BUSH.:-)

Have a nice Evening

Rob

* to be determined and agreed upon in advance with the aid of active board participation(if any) to reach a consensus.