" "Maybe if you didn't rip the Republican's guts out with a boathook every time they take a step in your direction it might happen more often."

You have a good point here. The Democrats have not been displaying enough reqards for the delicate sensitivities of the Retardlican leadership. ----Ooops, call them Retardlicans is a good example of your point, my apology. I am sorry the the Republicans appear so retarded in their reqard to the plight of their fellow citizens. "

Tom, is simply making a point, which apparently despite being stated rather plainly, you fail to understand. The point is that it's a bad thing to politicalize this war. There are many wise Dems who understand this, apparently you don't.

"I don't wish to rip their guts out with a boathook just because they led us into a war for bogus reasons. Especially now that they are being big enough to admit their reasons and the information they fed the citizens were indeed, bogus."

There were not "bogus reasons". The Congress voted for this war. The UN agreed that there would be severe consequences if Saddam did not fully cooperate- which he failed to do. The second aspect, is we were already ready at war with Iraq- in many different ways. The simpliest way to understand this is that ANY sanctions, is an act of war. Another thing to consider is the situation in regards to the Kurds. If N korea, were to support, say Oregonians who wanted independent from the US, we would consider that an act of war [as would any other country].
As far as the hotter types of war, Iraq was firing on US warplanes- that's war. And legally, we were still at war until Saddam complied with his cease fire agreement. Saddam started this war by invading Kuwait, if he had complied with the cease fire agreement he could have ended that war- sanctions would have ended, the "No fly Zone" would ceased, and Saddam could have "legally" done whatever was neccessary to "bring order" to the Kurdish area- as long as the Kurds had not been recognized "by enough nations" as to be "considered" an independent state- basically if the Kurds had a seat at UN as a nation then it fit this requirement.

"Spending 500 billions of taxpayers money based on faulty, false and fabricated "intelligence" should be best seen as a Republican "Opps!" and it is petty to "rip the Republican's guts out with a boathook" and use the lies fed us in that cause to question what they have to say about the jobs situation, or the security situation."

It wasn't "false and fabricated "intelligence" ", rather it was an honest assessment by US and other nations intelligence.

"The words of Mark Twain cover this situation, "Lettin' the cat out of the bag is a whole lot easier'n puttin' it back." But then, Twain was a Democrat."

I would say that Iran played a large role in letting this cat out. Holding American hostages, was a big mistake- and it was predictably a big mistake. It led the US not to have formal relations with Iran. Generally it's a bad idea not to have foreign relations with a Superpower. This poor relationship led Saddam to conclusion that he could invade Iran. This failed war, led Saddam to then invade Kuwait. Could the US have handled the war with Iraq and Iran differently- could it have ended it sooner. Well, one problem was the US had poor relations with Iraq and no relations with Iran, so the US was in a bad situation to have much influence. Other countries were in a much better status to affect the outcome- and they apparently had other interests other than encouraging a peace.
The problem with both extreme wings of Left and Right in the US is they imagine that the US has this huge influence on all that happens in the world. The US does have a huge economic and miltary power, but even if this power was ten times as much as it is, the US power would be limited. As a guess, I would imagine that in the Iran-Iraq war, the French or the Soviets had more leverage [real power] than the US- and they apparently thought that selling Iraq huge amount of miltary supplies was the best solution.