"Willcox" wrote in message
ss.com...
Tom Miller wrote:

As an outsider from the other side of the world, ( though we've been
sucked
into it) I believe that the problem was really caused by Bush 1.He
should
have told Swartzkof not to stop when he had the chance in 1991.

Right after the "catastrophic success" Bush 1 merely suggested that we
finish the job when he was immediately met with threats of impeachment
by a Democrat controlled Congress and the mainstream press practically
declared he was breaking the alliance and starting World War 3.

That's why we didn't go into Bagdad.

Or, was there another (oily ) reason that
they didn't want Sadam out at that time?

Because if we did Bush would win the next election hands down. That's
also why Bush was under so much pressure to sign that "no new taxes" tax
bill.


The press lied about what the 9-11 commission said:

http://server2.cybertarp.com/~peryno...-ties.lies.jpg

Your reference clips the 9-11 Commission report at an interesting and
probably (for them) a convenient place. Here's what they left out, after
their last sentence, "According to the reporting, Iraqi officials offered
Bin Ladin a safe haven in Iraq..."

"Bin Ladin declined, apparently judging that his circumstances in
Afghanistan remained more favorable than the Iraqi alternative. The reports
describe friendly contacts and indicate some common themes in both sides'
hatred of the United States. But to date we have seen no evidence that these
or the earlier contacts ever developed into a collaborative operational
relationship. Nor have we seen evidence indicating that Iraq cooperated with
al Qaeda in developing or carrying out any attacks against the United
States. [76]"

That's from the Commission Report. It's exactly the way _The New York Times_
reported it, and other print media reported much the same thing.

--
Ed Huntress