🚀 go-pugleaf

Completely frustrated by their inability to belittle, sneer at or 
just plain falsify about the victory of our troops in Iraq, opponents
of the president are now reduced to using bits and pieces of non-
evidence to contend that we did not have to replace the brutal regime 
of Saddam Hussein.

The current version of their attempts to find a campaign issue goes
like this: The president should not have "alleged" in his January State 
of the Union address that Iraq had sought to buy uranium in Africa.

In fact the president did not "allege" this. He correctly reported that
the British government had learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought
significant quantities of uranium from Africa.

That we have not yet located huge deposits of weapons of mass 
destruction does not mean they do not or did not exist. After all, 
we have not yet found Saddam Hussein or his remains--but not even
Democratic presidential candidates or the New York Times contend 
that he did not exist.

from:
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110003765

     ===========================================

The ending has a good question for the liberals? DO you believe
Saddam existed? We can't find him either. We never found Hitler's
body. Does that mean WWII is still going on?