Conservation Voice wrote: Which proves we went after the wrong target in the Mideast.
Oh please! You were willing to actively support a military takeover of Iran?
Would it have been any different militarily than what we did in Iraq? At least we'd be in wars in adjoining countries, which might have made logistics easier.
We went after non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. At least we would have accomplished something if we had gone into Iran instead. I'm still PO'd about the U.S. Embassy takeover and hostages who were held for 444 days.
Accomplish what? You know Elbaradei told us years ago that Iran was not trying to make a nuclear bomb. We would have made the same mistake, going after non-existent weapons, non-existent weapons that we had a full report on the fact that they did not exist.
I guess you wanted us to make the same mistake twice.
