Let’s be honest here. It all depends on which way you want to hate America. If we’re talking about WMDs in Iraq, they didn’t exist. If we’re talking about how America is immoral, they did exist and we sold them to Iraq.

As most of the posters here understand, it’s not the facts (nor the spelling, punctuation, and grammar) that matter so much as having it both ways. In this case, Thompson’s implying that the WMDs Hussein used to kill 100,000 Kurds and 50,000 Iranians were real. We can’t let him get away with that immoral view, just as we can’t let people think that the 500-or-so canisters of WMD materials we’ve recovered since the invasion suggest that Hussein had WMDs.

As long as Thompson argues that there were WMDs, we need to maintain that the “slaughters” of the Kurds and Iranians were faked. They were staged by the same people who faked the moon landing and who organized the inside-job conspiracy of 10,000-strong to destroy the World Trade Center.

If you doubt the effectiveness of the Jewish cabal that controls the world, consider this: They’re deviously savvy enough to know that the best way to get us to invade Iraq was to use not one Iraqi as a “hijacker.”

If you still doubt the effectiveness of this Jewish cabal, consider THIS: Not one person involved in any of these conspiracies — from the moon landing, to the “massacres” in Iraq, to the “attack” on the World Trade Center — has ever come forward. Be afraid.

YEAH THOMPSON.

I don't understand why none of you are willing to address Korea…

Sadam had the potential to create WMDs… so do most countries… It isn't as hard as you all make it out to be… you can make mustard gas in fairly large quantities out of your home… get over it… WMDs are a smoke screen for the real issues. The fact that we say WMDs is sad in itself. What is a weapon of mass destruction? Is the fertilizer bomb that took out the federal building a WMD?

The question should be, why we slapped Iraq for WMDs but not Korea. Kimmy over there in N. Korea is a lunatic and doesn't even let his people travel. They are completely locked off from the outside world. Even Iraqis didn't have to worry about that.

Please just address the fact that there was no reason to attack Iraq other than oil. Korea, Darfur, Burma, ethiopia… places where the people are truly suffering don't have anything to offer… so why help them? This seems to be the mentality of America… which is sad.

Another CLOWN making same statement.
What a joke American people have to listen to.

The last comment wasn't directed at me but in response to the last part I think we should intervene in Burma and Darfur with our army if diplomacy doesn't work.

What a bad actor!

Many say he had them shipped to Syria. So lets just say that he did ship them to Syria allthough the pres,vp,and rumsfield have all said that he didn't but lets say he did. If they were shipped to Syria as many are saying they did and we knew. Then why didn't we atk. Syria instead of Iraq? Should't that have been the first priority to make sure that we got them WMD instead of doing something about it 2 weeks ago. I think what happened in Syria 2 wks ago had alot more to do with showing Syria and Iran that our air force could travel undetected by Syria's new anti-aircraft missle systems from Russia that they recently aquired. I ask the question also what is the extent of the US involvement considering the fact that we provided Sadamm with the gas to kill the Kurds. The Kurds were largely responsible for providing food for Iraq. That combined with sanctions which led to the deaths of over 500,000 children that will be growen up yrs later certainly makes for a much easier take over of Iraq. Much research should be done on the fact of was the Bush admin. just another part of a greater plan that was allready in the works. Remember the Clinton admin. also calling for a regime change. Their is also the first Iraq war and we cannot deny the fact of how the statement of Iraq not wanting to trade in dollars anymore was the initial cause for the invasion (too much to get into here) but Fred will never be president he might get the gop nod to take the fall for Hillary. The CFR has allready decided who will be the president and it will be her. She will continue the neocon agenda she has allways been on board for invasion. She voted for Iraq, the patriot act, she on board with Bush for Illegals, She voted for authority to give Bush to hit Iran 2 weeks ago. She also was involved with Bush on the recent hits in Syria by Israel.

to tom from mission viejo, ca:

tom, clearly you have never served in our country's military. and if you have, you have obviously never been deployed in combat. you speak of war as if it is a necessity, and to some extent it is. i'm certainly not deluding myself enough that i think war is avoidable, but to insinuate (well, not really isinuate - explicitly state) that our biggest mistake was getting out of vietnam indicates a lack of understanding exemplary of someone who gains all his knowledge from second-hand sources. to compare the iraq war to WWII doesn't display a lack of understanding, it displays a lack of intelligence and capability for critical thinking. do you really think our situation with islamic extremism is comparable to nazi fascism? hitler was the leader of an independent state, with a national economy and a world-class military at his disposal. he was a madman clearly bent on world domination. he was responsible for the deaths of millions upon untold millions. at best, the leaders of islamic extremism have loose confederations of ill-equipped, angry young men, spread across the globe. at times, these angry young men are capable of devastating destruction (9/11, madrid), but are they capable of blitzkrieg and overrunning and entire continent in a few short months? absolutely not. the "war on terror" will not be solved with a war, because terror is not a nation-state or an individual that can be killed or crippled to the point of incapacity. it's an idea that anyone can grab onto, be it islamic extremist or your next-door neighbor who has finally had enough of his crummy job and goes postal. your assertion that war is necessary to stamp out islamic extremism is totally off-base.

as to your "understanding" of middle eastern history, i don't know what to make of that. apparently, you have been reading some pretty creative text books. saddam did not assassinate the president of iraq in a coup. the baathist party had already been in power for several years when the president abdicated due to health problems. those health problems probably weren't actually health problems, but he certainly wasn't assassinated. and your claim that the middle east was all friendly democracies is ridiculous as well. those "democracies" were at best puppet governments installed by western powers that had controlled the region until then. you are right about one thing: saddam did have weapons of mass distruction and he did use them on the kurds and in the iran/iraq war of the 1980s. but if you're so adamant that we should fighting a war over there, why are you not outraged that we sat by for an entire decade (1990s)and did nothing to depose this evil madman and his vast arsenal of weapons of mass distruction? perhaps it's because you know like every other rational, critically-thinking person in this country that saddam and iraq has never and would have never been a threat to the united states. cruel dictator? yes. evil madman? yes. capable of world domination or even harm to the united states? not in a thousand years. we are fighting an insurgency in iraq because we created it by invading iraq. and if you think that staying is justified by the suffering it would cause if we left, then again, why are you not outraged by the brutal and violent crackdown against democracy in myanmar? why are you not passionately advocating that we intervene in darfur, where hundreds of thousands of people have been systematically killed?

i realize that your closed mind will dismiss every one of my arguments, but deep down, i think you know that you know nothing. wake up, tom. start thinking for yourself. your mindless reactions are tearing this country apart.

This guy is a twit and his campaign is clearly a waste of money that could be better spent on…frito pie, beer and ammo that those NRA folks insist is an important right. I suppose that's iin the interest of a possibe insurrection if some moron like Thompson manages to get himself elected by promising that on his watch no sodomy (consensual or otherwise) and no abortions will be permitted and all taxes will be eliminated for anyone making more than 12 dollars an hour.

let this guy rant all he wants, there needed to be some comedic relief in politics, he is giving Bush a run for his money on who is the bigger moron

All of you people make me laugh. Consider this…had our fine up-to-the-minute media not broadcast that we were going to invade Iraq two weeks before we did, do you think we may have possibly found WMDs? Saddam was highly connected and could have gotten rid of them just as easily as we could have planted a few and said it was there when we got there. All of you who say we never should have taken him out of power are basically saying you didn't care about the fact that he was committing genocide and mass murders. And you call Thompson a moron? I am not a Thompson supporter, but the lack of common sense from the general public in here is nauseating. Jumping on political bandwagons is what gets this country into trouble. Get your own opinions (after actually doing research AND using common sense), and please stop repeating what everyone else says. If you honestly think you are more informed than a former U.S. Senator, there are asylums that would gladly take you in because you are obviously delusional.

You liberals are just angry because Fred Thompson makes people like you wet your pants!!!

Yes Saddam had WMD's. He used them on his own people. What people do not remember is that Saddam was a brutal dictator. For that reason alone not only the US but other countries should have acted to remove this barbarian from power.

If GWB wants Hillary to get the nomination, then I want Fred for her opponent!

Iraq had no WMDs. Period.

Vote for the one Republican that is willing to get us out of there right now!

VOTE RON PAUL 08!

of the,currently, 159 posts i read about half of them and they broadly epitomize the lack of intelligence and thinking ability of the average american. no wonder these politicians talk to americans like they insultingly do. Mr Thompsons quotes are factually correct, his speach terrible and what he meant us to understand is true. at one time saddam DID have and if given opportuniuty, eventually would have WMD or worse. Alan Greenspan himself said on CNN just last week Saddam needed to be taken out of power because he was attempting to contol the outflow of oil from that region. with regards to CNN controling these posts i speculate they may put more complaining posts up to slate YOUR opinions.

Are you kidding me? Is this guy really running for President? Lol. It is hilarious. I swear it is! Lol.

What a total buffoon. This neocon moron simply wants to finish Bush Jr's job.. which is to bankrupt this nation, send the common people to the sewer, while him and his rich connected cronies rake in the war profiteering bonanza all the neocons and their allies have been enjoying the past 4+ years.

Obviously at the time we went to war there weren't WMD in Iraq, I'm not sure I buy this idea that they were shipped to Syria but I don't totally discount it. However, that doesn't change the fact that Iraq had used WMD in the past to kill 100k Kurds and had invaded two other countries. Should we overlook the 12 failed UN resolutions, past history of using WMD, and invading other countries to say that what we did was wrong? While it hasn't gone they way we wanted I am in the opinion that had we done nothing, Saddaam at some point would have started another war. I believe that if we had removed him from power in the first war what is happening now would have occured but by now, 2007; Iraq would be a funtioning democracy with little ethnic violence. What we did will in the end be proved right it will just take 20 years to prove it.

What a idiot Thompson has become.
Actors should act not try to be president.We saw what Reagan did to this country during his time as president and he only proved he could act.We need real leadership,not bad actors.

Nobody believes you..Oh there are some idiots out there who do ..Tell that Anglo Nagger he has no chance. Only to make a fool of himself.

Not only does his head look like a cabbage with eyes, he obviously has the I.Q. of a cabbage as well. What a dope.

What is this guy smoking? Saddam barely had control of a third of his own country and he would have been controlling the middle-east?

Sounds like Fred wants the Bush "old boy" election machine to back his ill founded campaign to me.

Fred just go back to bad tv/movies and stay out of politics! Maybe you can convince bad tv producers of your rugged, no-nonsense acting abilities of make believe world, but I've had it with the country boys and their gedder done attitude which just causes problems for the entire country!

Fred…..those weapons of mass destruction must be hidden somewhere in Iraq. We need to find them…..LOL

keep your acting job, pal. Or better quit altogether, because you're hallucinating from all your acting scripts.

And we thought George was the Dumb one of the bunch. What's that old saying? "You can fool some of the people all of the time". Ought to be the GOP's Theme Song for the 08 elections.

The sad truth is that currently just over one quarter of the American people believe that the US actually found WMDs when we went in. Also sad is the fact that over one third believe that Saddam was responsible in part for 911.

I at one point actually thought of looking at Fred seriously.. Now I know I was seriously wrong for even considering him.

The worst part of all of this crap is that Fred's comments already show how the Republicans are going to play this election. They need to get off their butts and realize what America needs and how America should be. The entire has lost it's mind (and Fred is the current example).

According to our own military, WMD are nuclear and weapons that can really do 'mass destruction'. All Saddam EVER had were biological,chemical, gases, etc. and was of no threat to us EVER!!!(You certainly can't send the kind he had over the ocean!)
I hate it when I hear people speaking of "Weapons of Mass Destruction" and they don't even know what they are!!!
If Saddam was still in control of Iraq
wouldn't it be nice??? Our idiot leaders have certainly made a mess of things and to a people that didn't deserve it. We wouldn't like someone to take us over and try to change our religion, government and culture now would we?

To All of the MORONS who didn't pay Attention:

WE didn't look for them…British Intelligence ALREADY DID THAT! The former head of MI6 went there and LOOKED and published a report saying they were moved to SYRIA…Saddam KNEW we were coming because of the idiot reportors broadcasting internationally about the USA's PLANS. The former head went back to England and told MI6 that they had all been moved becuase Saddom knew we were coming!

So STOP railing on Fred. He's right. You're wrong. Get over it. NOW!

It sounds like former Tennessee Senetor was born yesterday. it is ridiculous to hear from this Republican candidate saying "Saddam Hussein CLEARLY had WMD". Here we go with another Republican presidential JOKER candidate. If we did not find any WMD, why then this late comer Republican JOKER candidate is making such a stupid statement ? May be, when he is, if he is, probably he is, elected president he will attach Iraq again to find the whereabouts of the WMD. What a waste of time, what a waste of this Republican JOKER. It seems This former Tennessee senator has no other issues to offer to us, but reminds us of the stupid mistakes disaster George Bush put us into. I can believe Thompson's stupid statement… did he inter the race so late to give us such a stupid remark ? Or is he planning to become another Disaster Goerge Bush. What a JOKER this Thompson is ?

yea right and Thompson's wife married him for his good looks, ha-ha-HAHAHAHA-ha

I would pay 10,000 to see Fred debate Ron Paul 1on1. Dr. Paul would send him back to TV Land!!! Where he belongs.

Fred has not given up his acting career, he's just changed roles. He must be reading from a script written by Bill Crystal and playing to 33% of the audience who drank Kool Aid during intermission. You were more believable on Law and Order, Fred.

Aw, i see these forums are nothing more then a right wing bashing ground. the fact is we can't prove or not prove the fact wmd's were or not there. don't try to act as if he were a madman because he has his own theory. for you to all sit there and pretend he wasn't working toward wmd's is even more absurd.

"We can't forget the fact that although at a particular point in time we never found any WMD down there, he clearly had had WMD,"

I dont think grampa is playing with a full deck here. He admits that we didnt find any WMD and then he goes on to say he CLEARLY hadh had WMD. Well there is nothing clear about it. He is like a little kid. Just because you say something over and over again doesnt make it true. The problem here is that Gramps may actually start to beleive it

I think Fred has been watching too much TV. he thinks law and order is a real??

Maybe he doesn't read anything but scripts??

Man this guy is really out of touch.

Thompson is living on some bizzaro, revisionist-history version of planet earth. Statements like "[Saddam Hussein]would have been the new dictator of that entire region in my estimation" have no basis in fact. Prior to the U.S. invasion, Iraq had been divided into three pieces, with Hussein only in partial control of one of the pieces and removed from control of the other two. He had fought Iran for a decade and gained nothing. His military had been destroyed in the first Gulf War. He was OPPOSED by Al Qauida. Where Thompson came up with this absurd theory that Hussien was a powerful man taking over the world is beyond me.

You know, as a Canadian, I get a completely different view. Yes, he did have WMDs in the 80s and gassed all those Kurds etc….these WMDs and Saddam's nuclear program were destroyed systematiclaly by the ISraelis at Osirak and then the Maericans during Gulf War II. Now you have over 300 000 troops and you still think he has or even had them and no one found them? Man…sometimes Republicans have their heads screwed on backwards. This war was useless. Iraq is a uslim nation which can only be controlled by a dictator or a religious fanatical leader. I dare anyone to find me a DMEOCRATICALLY elected governemnt…and don't even say Egypt with its 99% majority for Mubarak…Saddam got 99% too in his lact election…vote for me or be shot lol. Thompson has to learn to do something intelligent. He already has no credibility just with this comment.

You're kidding, right? It is a well-established fact that Saddam had no WMD and no capability to produce WMD, much less a nuclear weapon. God help the United States if Fred Thompson is elected President.

Fred is the type of leader that this Country needs after W leaves. Of course we are better off because of what George W did! My question to all those who are against Bush and Thompson is this: If 911 happened and someone other than Bush was in office, what would they have done to protect the American people? Remember, Under the Bush Leadership, we as a Country have never had another attack! Thank God and I give the credit to George W

The CNN Political Ticker is clearly read and commented on by people who ony read the NYT and watch MSNBC and, unfortunately, CNN. So sorry. For your education, WMD means "Weapons of Mass Destruction," and not "armed nuclear missiles." Certain forms of chemical agents can easily kill masses of people - and Saddam used these agents. Photographic proof is easily found on the internet, as one sorce. The fact that these photos were taken long before our invasion is not a reason to disavow there existence. They existed. And many of them exist today. Just two days ago a returning soldier reported on the IEDs he had examined in Iraq, stating that they were chemical shells. Therefore WMD. And that is today. To think that somehow chemical shells exist today, after Saddam, and weren't there when we invaded is silly. Now, back to nuclear WMDs. Anyone read about Syria being attacked by Israel? How they hit a nuclear target? Happened a couple weeks ago. Ever wonder why Bush refused to say a single word about it in his press conference? "No comment" he said twice. And, how far away is Syria from Iraq? That's right, they b-o-r-d-e-r each other. How hard do you think it would be to smuggle out nuclear related materials before the US invasion, and bury the rest in the sand? Simple. All of you on this list who are still living in a self delusional 9/10 world where terrorist nuclear holocaust doesn't seem possible should go back to kindergarden and get an education. We live in a world where the common car bomber is not the extent to which terrorists can effect our lives in North America. They can wipe out New York or DC. If you keep thinking that scenario is fit for a suspense novel and not real life, then you, truly, have not been paying attention.

You morons. Thompson said Hussein "HAD had" WMD's; i.e., he had them at one time, not that he had them when we invaded. The point is that he destroyed them when he was under pressure and would have restarted the program after the heat was off. READ THE QUOTE!

Very difficult to digest what’s on Fred's mind? Trying to get Bush's support? Just plain stupid as someone has suggested.
Now a days politicians would say anything to please voters. This is certainly not the case.
Trying to beat a dead horse? Saddam won't be able to respond, Fred.

I always thought Rummie paid Saddam money to get some WMDs and that's why they were so sure they were there and so startled when they weren't.

Turned out Saddam spent the money on the Mother of All Parties instead.

"My quote of "Saddam had WMD" was a factual statement. Did he have them in 2002 before we invaded, time will only tell if shipments made it into Syria, or in fact it was a rouse."

Your statement is factual like the factual statement "The United States had slaves." The question is whether that is relevant at the present time, namely in regards to the questions of whether or not Bush was justified in invading and reducing Iraq to a sea of blood. The answer to that question as has been demonstrated time and yet again is quite cleary "NO."

"Time will tell" is a justification for total war, thousands upon thousands of ended and displaced lives, terrorized and traumatized Iraqi children, depletion and betrayal of American troops, and an increase of instability worldwide? Now I have heard it all.

Conservatives do not have to convince the rest of us that we must fight terrorism. Islamofascism is quite clearly a threat…but what does that have to do with Saddam? Too bad instead of confronting countries at the forefront of this threat - like Iran and Saudi Arabia - Bush instead chose to plunge America into decades of moral and economic debt by his ill-advised and deceitful misadventure in Iraq.

Shame on Bush-voting Republicans!

He sounds like a moron and he's saying the same old thing as everyone else.

BS MORE REPUBICAN BS.
THE ONLY THING HUSSAN HAD WAS OIL.

Forget polling…Fred should take a look at all the posted comments here to gauge his political pulse - and since he took so long getting into the race, maybe he can move quicker to remove himself. Worse than Bush? A scary possibility.

BTW, we continue to find evidence of Iranian caches of weapons turning up in Iraq, and guess why the Israeli's made a big hole in the norther remote regions of Syria in a recent air strike supported by US satellite imagery and overflight permission by ARAB countries to attack this site and eliminate it's use. There are thousands of Iraqi's who fear the foreign element in their country that are trying to use Iraq as the gathering point for another AlQueda type country within a country, with QUDS Iranian terrorists and 80% of the insurgents being foreign to Iraq. The US. is not going to allow that to happen, and the criminal UN thieves who caused thousands of deaths from their own greed, Kofi Annon and sons,need to be eliminated. The human rights commission of the UN consisits of countries like Syria, etc with the worst record on human rights. The new French and German and Italian and Spanish conservative majorities now realize that not fighting in Iraq didn't make them one bit safer. The Spanish lost hundreds to murder on a bombed train for example.Thank God for the recognition of these Europeans who now recognize the Iranians are developing atomic weaponry for export and possible use in europe. The unwashed, illiterate, filthy bearded mullahs use the Palestinean problem as a false cause…they all threw them out….Jordan pushed them into the sea, the Syrians now are trying to destroy the emerging democratic government in Lebanon by assassination, and the Chinese, Koreans, Russians and Indians all see advantage in doing this.

This is another bloodlusting individual who needs to follow Newt and bow out of the race.He and McCain both lack the proof/truth and lie or repeat lies and should skip away and tiptoe through the tulips leaving the presidency to hopefully an honist person. thompson is no President Romald Reagan and never will be.

So…all of you people bad mouthing Fred, do you really not think that Saddam had previous knowledge of at least the possibility that we were coming to look for WMD? Do you really not believe he had the power, ability, and manpower to move them? Saddam was a sadistic man responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands of people. Left in power he would be responsible for the death of hundreds of thousands more. It is so scary to think of this country being led by such a blind group of liberals living in such an idealistic world that they think Saddam Hussein was an honest man. God Save America

Thompson is absolutely correct. WMD included the Sarin and other poison nerve agents used freely against the Iranians and against his own Kurdish population. Remember Chemical Ali, whose has just been convicted of war crimes and sentenced to hang. And Dr. Death (she admitted to manufacturing weaponized Anthrax for use against Iraq's enemies. And the Nuclear program which was set back by the Israeli bombing of the Osirik reactor site.And of the Iraqi intentions to reconstitute the nuclear program, the inspectors did find plans, key parts and hardward buried on the grounds of some of the scientists, whose families where threatened with death if they were to talk. And finally, Saddams brother in law, who was the admitted HEAD of the WMD development team, escaped to the west and acknowledged the existance of ALL of the above, but was lured back by Saddam who promised he would not be harmed. He was immediately executed when he returned to Iraq.The French(Chirac)had strong financial ties to Saddam and received millions for allowing the export of the hardware for Osirik reactor and for the smuggling of oil for profit. The UN team was EJECTED from the country 2 years before we went in. The Syrians have also got an extensive nerve gas and micro WMD program and much was transferred through western Iraq to them. Remember that Abu Nidal was also a guest of Saddam and had an apartment in Bahgdad. It is unfortunate that the criticisms that are being made against Thompson are levied by DEMOC"RATS" who never saw the dead bodies on film of the babies in mothers' arms nor the hundreds of thousands of dead Iranians in the marshes, killed by poison gas. Nor do they choose to remember that some caches of poison gas in shells WERE found after the invasion. And overheard and recorded NSA tapes presented at the UN by our Sec. of STate, Colin Powell, directly referred to making sure that the weapons had been completely destroyed before we invaded. Oh, there were WMD in Iraq and ties to terrorist Hezbollah activists, and BUSH NEVER SAID that Iraq played a direct role in the Trade Center Plane Attacks, only that they maintained training centers for terrorists, offered $25,000 to families of homicide bombers. We did the right thing. Valerie Plame was ADMITTEDLY OUTED by Richard Armitage, a state dept. commie and that her husband ADMITTED LYING about his initial reports about the potential sale of yellowcake to Iraq. Inquiries were actually made, and BTW the BRITS continue to stand by their assessment and intelligence regarding this. Just focus on facts on not blind hatred of our President when you cowards deny the presence of WMD in Iraq. Chemical Ali is being hanged for what reason then? His own words are taped by NSA saying to Saddam that he can eliminate the Kurds easily with the poison gas he had. Facts are sometimes hard to face, much easier to just be glib in your accusations without any proof. What kind of citizenry is that? I am NOT a Republican, but a former Democrat (when the party actually had ethics).

We introduced al Qaeda to Iraq when we invaded. As bad as Saddam was, he did not want any competition. Like many of our current republican canidates, he was a politically expedient religous man.

Yes , I agree that our allies in Europe should be pulling their heads out of the sand and contributing more troops and money to the cause. Europe is used to us providing most of their defenses while they focus on other things. I think it is time for them to step up but not in Iraq, that is our (Bush's) mess. All these countries are concerned about their economies and how much the sacrifice will hurt them. Worried about their economies? Under islamist rule worrying about the economy will be far down the list. Like I said I think times will have to become truly hard before anything is done about it.

I will not pretend that I have an answer to this problem, I just know that our country has made many mistakes (both parties here) when dealing with the middle east in particular. It is going to take a long time to work our way out of it. In the meantime I will avoid supporting any canidate who has a knee-jerk-response problem and uses fear as a mechanism to get elected.

By the way, Tom I did not support this war because I, somehow, knew that the result would end up like it has. I wrote both my senators stating this but they were both knee-jerk (sorry to use this twice) supporters of Bush. One of them lost his seat last election.

Once upon a time, Ronnie and Bush1's good buddy Saddam had WMDs. Too bad the media doesn't go into the details to explain how the usa not only sold him those weapons, but how loans were arranged in the usa that iraq later defaulted on and usa taxpayers paid. He had weapons, we bought them for him, just as we continue to arm the world at the behest of the international bankers and warpigs.

So we leave Iraq and Iran to their own devices and let them start a "Hot War' out in the desert, as Iran builds its nuclear weapons and Iraq starts up its programs once again (once the sanctions are lifted, thank you france /thank you Sarkozy for being elected).

Sure Saddam doesn't like the Iranians, which Arabs like Iranians?? They aren't Arabs and they're Shia. Saddam already attacked Kuwait, threatned SA, and had one war against Iran. Now the perhaps the two biggest military powers in the Middle East are supposed to share the Arab Gulf / Persian Gulf?
Oil is actually one of their biggest weapons. If Iran could shut down the Gulf it would be disastrous to the global economy.

So not only is terrorism becoming a growing threat every passing year but you'd allow Iran and Iraq to duke it out in the Gulf? Not very stabalizing.

You ask why is there talk about attacking Iran? Get real. there has to be talk. Do you think Iran is going to back down if we rule out an attack? That just means we blinked first. thank god the Israelis have a head on their shoulders, they'll do something before we do.

Iran is already on the brink of another revolution, this time away from the Islamic Republic. We have to nuture that and do what we can to put pressure on the Iranian government. there already is build-up of dissatisfaction in the country and it needs to continue. The money they spend on the military is sapping their growth. They can't afford fuel subsidies anymore and that as angered many people.

You call our efforts the biggest flop in foreign affairs. If we can stick with this is will be exactly the opposite. Our biggest mistake was pulling out of Vietnam and stopping the funding of the South Vientnamese government. Over 2 million died because we couldn't see it through.

Communism was obviously terrible and threat to where it took hold. Why can't people realize that Islamo-fascism is a threat as well.

Oh, but you want to develop business relationships with Iran and Iraq, pre 2001? Um, we did. We had a very friendly relationship with Iran until the 1950s. We had a relationship with Iraq before Saddam assasinated the President of Iraq in the coup.

We had a relationship with Saddam afterward and had some ties with him…and he took that money and did what with it again? took the money and created a democracy? took the money to improve his country? No, he spent it on the military and his palaces and killing off part of his population to help start his Pan-arab dream.

We can develop ties with countries when they are willing and able, not while being run with dictators and theocracies. The only reason we have business relationships in China is because they are willing and want to slowly proceed with reform. Its up to them.

Of course, Saddam had no WMDs at the time of the invasion…

that's because he had already shipped them over to Syria in the months prior…

where, after what he thought would have been another war, he would simply retrieve them and reconstitute his program.

Well he just lost the primary with that stupid statement.

When Bush stated it, he fooled Congress into voting for going to war. He sent Colin Powell to the United Nations with the "Yellow Cake" accusations which turned out to be false.

Now everyone knows that Saddam had nothing but an empty "powder keg". Why does Thompson think people will believe this lie a second time? Not a chance Fred. Maybe you can fake your way into telling people you were taken out of context like Rush Limbaugh or Imus.

Telling it like I see it,
Wynter

Saddam was never a threat to the U.S., and he never would have been. Is that crazy?? No, it's fact. He was a threat to the Kurds. He was a threat to Israel. He hated Iran, which turned out to be a stabilizing factor in the region.

So what now, all you folks who think Bush did the right thing? We stay in Iraq forever? We begin to draw down when? It doesn't really matter, because our military presence in Iraq will never resolve the problems there. If we do stabilize Iraq into a more democratic state, it will vote to follow Iran's lead, and that will only create a larger threat to Israel.

Why all the talk about attacking Iran? It's largely because the inevitable result of our attack on Iraq is an Iraq/Iran alliance that could be very bad for stability in the region.

How do we prevent that now? The options aren't good. First, we could just through out the Iraq government and take over the country. Make it a U.S. territory and install our own government there. No one mentions this, because it would be such an outrageous move. Shouldn't happen, and won't happen.

So what's left? Attack Iran. Then what? What government takes over in Iran? Do we have a plan for that?

You can go in an change history and force democracy on countries like we dreamed of doing in Iraq. If you want to spread democracy, then make yourself an example others will want to follow. That's our biggest failure in foreign affairs. Since the Cold War ended, we've tried to be the World's cop. And much of the world now resents us for it.

If we spent a fraction of what this war has cost to develop business relationships in Iraq, Iran, Pakistan and other "problem" countries, we would begin to develop the kind of ties needed to find peace one day. We are so far away from that now, I don't know how we ever will get things back on track.

Thompson is making himself a joke. Those who support him are wasting their time, energy, and money. He will only serve to marginalize and polarize us more.

Sarah:

Yes, the Saudis are part of the problem. These countries that don't take a hard stance against the radical religious schools are bringing about many problems. The fault does lay with them. BUT, we have to deal with the problem.

We are vigilant in our defense, but wasn't britain vigilant after 9/11 and after Madrid? There's only so much we can do before putting our head in the sand and wishing it would go away. When their problems are crossing our borders and flying planes into our buildings, its time to stop playing patty-cake.

We have been fighting the Taliban, but right now there is a much bigger fight going on in Iraq. Maybe if we didn't have so much political opposition from Democrats, we could put more troops into each country. Maybe if France, Russia, and Germany would help contribute we could have more forces in Afghanistan. The Taliban ought to be taken ough and they will be dealt with, but al Qaeda and their proxies are more focused in Iraq, so that's where we fight. Destroying the Taliban wouldn't stop al Qaeda or terrorism. Its just one cog.

Fuel conservation? the United States is not 'dependent' on Middle East oil. The world is. But if you want to talk about where we actually get our oil:
1.) from the United States (we are our biggest supplier)
2.) Canada
3.)Mexico
4.) Venezuela
5.)Saudi Arabia (about 12%)
6.) Nigeria
And remember, we sell most of our Alaskan oil to Japan.

i do agree with you that too many people care just about abortion (democrats, too). Taxes are important though. We cannot become a socialist country.

I like how liberals get infuriated when soeone points out that Saddam not only had WMD's, he used them against Iran, Kuwait, and the Kurds. Of course it's much more fashionable to paint him as the secular bulwark against Shiite fanaticism. I guess the libs saw Saddams Iraq as a kind of modern Byzantine Empire.

Mr. Thompson's best role is on Law & Order, where he can make believe and pretend to be in charge. I truly don't believe he can be effective as President of the United States. He just has that "good ole boys" demeanor about himself. I just hope that Black Repulblicans can see past his sheet.

Again, the chemical weapons used by Iraq in the 1980s was supplied by France. Germany built Saddam's bunkers. France, Germany, and Russia, all wanted sanctions lifted off Iraq in 2000, so their oil and natural gas companies could take the contracts Saddam bribed those countries with.

No wonder those three countries were so adammantly opposed to the war…but was that ever in the mainstream media?

Why don't some of you people start reading the comments and actually get a discussion going. Fairly petty and immature to just call people names…doesn't really do anyone justice to not have an intelligent discussion

I dont know what you are talking about Fred!! Did you just wake up.

Well atleast we know people actually read this ticker! Glad to see the intelligent responses to his ridiculous statements. There may have or may not have been WMDs… the question is, why was that reason to attack him? Other countries have bigger ones. Other countries threaten to use them. Other countries openly oppose the USA. Why did we need to attack Iraq. Sadam himself had talked down about Al'Queda originally. None of the terrorists were even from Iraq… So riddle me this Batman… Why did we attack Iraq and not North Korea???? I pose this question to Haliburton.

To Tom, Mission Viejo, CA

You are correct in a lot of what you are saying about lack of jobs and economic problems bringing about dictatorships. But the countries in the middle-east do not support anything other then religous schools (Saudi Arabia being one of them), which of course offers nothing. The people come out of these schools with no skills. In Saudi Arabia there are men who have no jobs and plenty of free time. Idle minds and hands build only resentment. The fault lies not only with us but the governments of those countries. They are bringing on their own problems by not properly educating their citizens.

We need to be vigilent in our defense but we need to stop meddling around in these countries affairs. We have meddled enough, no wonder they hate us.

I believe that terrorism is a serious problem that needs to be addressed seriously. That will require sacrifice from us all, something that the current administration has never had the courage to do. If we were really serious, we would be fighting the Taliban, in Afganistan, with special forces. Much like they fight us. If we were really serious, the president would be a true leader and impose fuel conservation and we would start doing something about our outrageous dependence on the middle-east for oil. I think we are headed for some rough times but I do not trust the republicans to do anything about it as they seem only concerned about abortion, guns and taxes.

Fred is right on. Saddam took months to hide and didn't even know we were coming. He had years to move WMDs out of his country which we KNEW were there since he'd used gas attacks before.

There was NO reason to leave Saddam in power. He was a criminal oppressing his people. Everyone that says "well he kept things in balance with Iran" needs to remember "two wrongs don't make a right."

The fact is the right thing to do was draft 2 million men into the army, nationalize production for the war and spend some REAL money to do it right. This war was half assed. 5% of the GDP is spent on it. When we kicked Hitler's ass in WWII the American people SACRIFICED, rationed, and donated to make sure that well over 60% of the GDP went into the war effort. And guess what, they had to argue for months to convince the American people that Hitler had to be stopped too.

"No war" is a childish slogan that fails to recognize the reality of evil in the world. 20,000 years of history hasn't put an end to war, let's face it, it's NEVER going to end. There will always be bad men that need to be stood up to by great men. Anyone whom will always say "no war" shouldn't even be allowed to comment on these types of things, yet their voices are often the loudest these days. Pitiful.

Someone remind me, who is Fred Thompson???? Why do I care what he thinks or does?

He's some hack, behind the scenes politico who got advanced to evangelize the cause by the right wing, since they're fearful of Guiliana and Romney.

These guys - Thompson, et al - are as bad as the mullahs.

BTW, what if we spent $700B on health care in the US, instead of the cesspool we've now created in the middle east?

Assuming that Thompson knows where bush's popularity rating is right now, it's very surprising that he would sound so much like him. One or two more statements like this will reduce his chances of getting into the White House to ZERO.

Ya right, so a set of scientists and
above 150K soldiers were all fools not
to have found these WMDs in Iraq but
Mr. Thompson has done so, without even
setting foot in Iraq. Idiot to the core.

To all you brilliant minds that know what happened to the WMD's - why don't you do something about it. While you're at it, stop the Martians from taking our oil and driving up gas prices. Please, we need your help. Get involved.

We went to Iraq with the available information we had at that time, including but not limited to, the previous two-term Clinton Administration. Sadam needed to be removed which unfortunately was not done during the Gulf War. Hence Sadam had years to plan for the inevitable!

PLEASE don't confuse Thompson with the rest of us Republicans. He's does not speak for me.

This man is out of it!!!

Ever seeen the storage vials the size of an index finger that have enough chemical to kill hundreds of thousands (as he already did). It's like finding a needle in a haystack. They also found dozens of chemical labs that had been abandoned and mobile chem lab trucks buried under the desert sands. Whatever you feel about the war or Bush, to say there was never WMD in Iraq is lunacy.

Does anyone want to comment on the Israeli bombing that happened in Syria two weeks ago?

The Syrians aren't protesting, the Iranians are quiet, the North Koreans are quiet. What is everyone keeping quiet for?

Who knows what really was going on there, but the fact that not one country in the Middle East is loudly crying foul over Israeli knocking out the Syrain air defenses and bombing a mystery location along the Iraq/Iran/Syria border is very interesting.

I'm not saying that whatever Israeli bombed came from Iraq, but all of a sudden Syria is having North Korean vistors and Iranian Qod forces in the country.

Must be their weekly Bridge game, right? or maybe they like to watch re-runs of Rose on the View while they sip turkish coffee.

From watching American media its easy to see why americans think so poorly of our country. Its easy to call politicans names and mock them, but a lot harder to critically evaluate the broader scope of the issues we deal with.

Take some time and read the Declaration of Independence some time, the whole way through. Our founding fathers were amazing men with brilliant courage and a clarity of thinking that is still unsurpased in this country except by a select few. Honestly, i don't like any of the Republican or Democrat candidates in the current field. But i take issue with so many people being so blind to international issues.

If you disagree, fine, but lets use some thinking behind our reasoning, not just, "Fred is dumb" "bush lied people died" "No blood for oil" etc.

When WMD is defined as nuclear, biological and chemical, it is clear that Saddam had CHEMICAL weapons of mass destruction. I think we need to separate the three. Chemical is the least dangerous of the three, although still quite lethal. And while Saddam had grandeous plans for building an arsenal of NUCLEAR weapons, I believe he was far from getting them.

As for Fred Thompson, it is good to see that he left the imaginary world of Law & Order for the imaginary role of legitimate presidential candidate. Maybe he will soon become a footnote in this rather interesting political season of bluster and bravado, half-truths and propaganda.

We really need more politicians who will not willfully deny reality whenever they find it politically expedient.

In the land of the of right-wing idiot, the out-of-touch actor is KING. Thank you Fred for your enlightened thoughts on such unexplored topics as WMD in Iraq. Oh and Fred, it's never too late to dispute that whole "the world is round" bit either. Good luck!

To David:

I am privy to all the information that the UN and US government make accessible to the public, and from numerous journals that pertain to the subject of Middle Eastern affairs.

That said, where do you get your information, the LA Times?

My quote of "Saddam had WMD" was a factual statement. Did he have them in 2002 before we invaded, time will only tell if shipments made it into Syria, or in fact it was a rouse. Again, the UN mission was to verify that Saddam had destroyed all his weapons. Iraq was supposed to provide documentation that this had happened. When the weapons inspection teams were kicked out of the country, then let back in, Iraq still had not produced the necessary verification that he had destroyed his munitions. If you read the 13 UN resolutions pertaining to his weapons programs and the repsonse the UN would take if not fulfilled, the US was within every legal standing to go into Iraq to finally see the process through.

So you say there were never WMDs. So what? You must wear blinders like a horse drawing a carriage. Take a look at the state of the entire Middle East and tell me the situation with al Qaeda and Islamic fascists was improving leading up to 9/11.

At what point do you say enough is enough? At what point do you say, 'Uh oh, we have a problem." Obviously 9/11 wasn't a big enough deal to objectively look at the state of affairs in the Middle East. This hotbed of terrorism has been smoldering for the past 20 years. 30% of the population is under the age of 30..and they have little prospect of finding relevent work in their country.

Is it any wonder that many young Iranians are pro-West? No, the Islmaic revolution has failed them. But they are powerless. The government cracks down hard on dissent, does not hold fair elections.

Is war the answer? sometimes it is, when your enemy is unwilling to compromise, and tends to be far more viscious than we comprehend. Again, we thought Hitler could be appeased and talked down. I think that was the wrong path..if i remember correctly. Many anti-war people in the 70s thought communism was cute and so in vogue. And then millions died. Millions died in Russia, too, while implementing their version of totalitarianism and communism. Have millions died in the Middle East…well, in the Iran Iraq war, yes. And the Arabs have tried unsuccessfully many times in the last half decade to rid themselves of the Jews.

This crazy, senile old man needs to retire to the tired, old actor's home. He has no business in the White House.

Thanks Fred! Perhaps you need to also remind people (mostly the Dems) about the caravan of military trucks leaving Iraq for Syria prior to the U.S. invasion. (But of course those trucks were not carrying WMDs…Saddam would NEVER be so crafty!)

Way to go Fred, what chance you had as president is now gone! I thought you had a little more intelligence than the idiot in the big house! Guess not!

These ignorants who are supporting actor Freddo must be listening Rush and watching Fox all the time. Yes! Saddam did kill Kurds in thousands. But, who provided the chemicals - US!
And by the time first inspectors went in after the Gulf war, they destroyed all the WMDs Saddam had. UN's chief inspector had a sworn testimony that Iraq had no WMDs by the time US invaded Iraq. Moreover, it was an established truth that Collin Powell's UN testimony was all made up. These biological trailers were nothing but computer generated drawings. Collin Powell was pressured to tell all the lies to create a perfect scenario to invade Iraq. If Freddo knowingly tries to bring that again to win republican nomination, he must be a fool or living in a fantasy world.

Thompson is playing exactly the role he signed up to play. The void in the Republican field was the absence of a true right-wing nut, someone who would cater to those folks out there who believe all the nonsense generated by the ultra-right-wing groups. What scares me is not Thompson, because he is doomed. What scares me is that he raised almost $12 million during the last quarter, and was only a candidate for about a month of that time. The folks on the far right have lots of money, and they have been saving it for someone like Thompson, who will tell them what they want to hear, whether there is any truth to it or not.

As to history judging, we won't need to wait very long. It's already pretty clear what a mess Bush created. The world was much safer before he took office, and would be much safer today if he'd stayed in Texas.

Well, I guess we don't have to worry about Fred blowing everyone out of the water with statements like these. Has he had his head in the sand all these 5 years? Perhaps he should go over there and point out to all of this where these WMD are.

And to the people who clain to know that Saddam spirited his WMD over the border to Syria, do you have proof? Why haven't the Syrians spirited the WMDs over to their clients in Lebanon?

Saddam got rid of them and then used the same trickery he had used for years to make his neighbors (as well as his own countrymen) think he still had them. As long as he could hold people in fear he could hang on to power. It's interesting that the republicans like using this same fear tactic. Saddam also did not want any terrorists in his country either. He could not control them since their loyaties lay elsewhere. I am not defending him, we after all supplied him back in the '80s.

The point is, I am not buying the fear or the lies anymore. I never did, I was part of the 20% who thought this whole war was misguided before it even began. We should have gone after the people who attacked us and stayed on it until the job was done.

Fred you idiot..get over it! WMD's were never found and never will be, because they don't exist!

I was concerned when Fred got in this race; that people might take a serious look at him, even though he is a neo-con. Now, I don't think we need to worry. He will be out of the race soon with that Rush Limbaugh blather coming out of his mouth.

To David:

Am I an uber-conservative? No. I believe in a small government that does a few things, but does them well (a pipe dream). I believe in gay marriage and tacitly support abortion, though wish we as a society didn't need it. I believe that Republicans in the current congress are mostly fools and power hungry wolves that are no better than most of the power hungry sheep Democrats.

That said…I believe the Administration has bungled a decent foreign policy agenda. Let me lay this out and see what you think:

Airline hostages and plane takeover. Munich Olympics. Lockerbe bombing. Beirut bombings. German disco bombings. Bali bombings. Egyptian shootings. Khobar Towers. WTC '91. Twin African embassy bombings. USS Cole. WTC '01. Madrid.

These are just a few few examples of the terrorist acts commited by Islamic fascists over the past 40 years. If you look at the evolution of the attacks, the become increasing violent and deadly. We've only in the last few years begun the plots out goverment foiled, too, like the Pacific version of 9/11. How about the Millenium bomber, Richard Reid, etc.

Given that the US had seen increasing terrorist acts commited against our interests in the 1990s, and then comes 9/11….do you honestly think that al Qaeda and its proxies were going to slow down after scoring their biggest strike of all time?

So looking at the Middle East…post 9/11, before the war: Libya still has WMDs, Iran is building nuclear weapons, Iraq may or may not have weapons but clearly has the capability and has shown want, Syria is a meanance to Lebanon and Israel. Why would these countries all of sudden stop supporting terrorism after the biggest and most successful terror attack of all time?

All the West has done to combat terrorism in the past 40 years is shake our heads and throw up our hands. Certainly Britian and France screwed over the Middle East in the 1900s with their Sir-Marks a lot borders they drew up. The US screwed up our friendly relationship with Iran in the 1950s, too. But we must repsond.

Remember, Iraq used to be a democracy before Saddam assasinated the President. Afghanistan used to be a democracy up until the 60s. These countries are capable of turning around but have been ruled by violent despots for over 30s years now. Look at how the German people embraced Nazism post WW I. They had no jobs, no economy, and no hope. Look at the Arabs, Persians, and Afghanis post Islamic revolution. They have no jobs, no economy, and no hope. Is it a wonder they have turned to supporting violent Islamic fascists, just like the Germans in their situation?

Time to step up to the plate. Defending Democracy isn't easy. We found that out in WWII. As much as we didn't want to involve ourselves int he meddling of Europe,it was inevitable. The forces of Nazism, Italian fascists who wanted to bring back the Roman empire, and Japanese imperialists who thought they could rule Asia, were forces that had to be reckoned with.

the Islamic fascists are spreading their ilk throughout the Middle East, southeast Asia, Africa, England, Norway… what's the end game?

What an idiot.

Just another Republican making his own assments and not abiding by the truth of what really was going on.

Good morning Fred Thompson! My, my you've been asleep for quite some time. There's only 3 people who believe that there were WMDs and connections to Al Queda…Bush, Cheney and you.

Uh, do you really want to be in that company?

Wake up Fred….its 2007!

" The United States did not give Iraq its chem/bio weapons…the French did.

Saddam had WMD, its a fact people."

Lord, Republicans just won't stop drinking the Kool Aid. I wish they would stop trying to make the rest of us drink it too.

Sorry, we all know Saddam had no working WMDs at the time we invaded. The UN knew it, and now the CIA, the FBI, and the 9/11 Commission have admitted it, not to mention President Bush and Vice President Cheney himself (who are well documented as having conceded as much during multiple press appearances on October 8, 2004, though apparently Tom from Mission Viejo wasn't born then) as well as every other reputable intelligence agency in the world.

And we're supposed to believe Tom from Mission Viejo is privy to some insight that all these people and organizations don't?

More reason why Republicans simply aren't taken seriously anymore.

Obviously, this guy is an empty suit and a moron. His candidacy is a joke.

Ryan, yeah, I once met a man who said another man told him that some guys this other guy knew were once stationed with some guys who'd been in the same platoon with this guy who used to know a guy who worked with these guys who flew out of a remote airbase and one day they met a guy who told them that a guy he knew saw the WMDs. You can't doubt a story like that, and this other guy said it was true too.

If this idiot is running for US president, I really pity for this country. I felt really bad when the current stupid idiotic president got reelected in 2004. Do Americans think at all or is their mind all washed up by idiots? I thought this country had more intelligent people compared to other countries but alas I was so wrong.

Does this guy do his own stunts? If so, that would explain this conclusion.

Thompson must be reading from some old 2002 script!!

Yo, Freddie - Iraq NEVER HAD WMD, COULD NOT MAKE THEM and WAS NEVER A THREAT!!

Anyone this out of touch should go back to television where he belongs. Real life is not television.

I don't even know where to start. Even though it was shown that U.S. intelligence was WRONG in its estimation that Saddam had reconstituted WMD programs, he still had WMD? Because Iran is developing a military nuclear capability, Iraq would have been able to do the same thing? In Thompson's enlightened "estimation," Saddam would be the "dictator of that entire region" by now had we not invaded and overthrown his regime? I'm not sure if it's ignorance or obstinance, but Thompson is showing that he does not understand the dynamics of the Iraq war or the region as a whole. Where are the facts to back up his comments and policy positions? Oh right, he doesn't have any. He's another unqualified, uneducated hack who has no business speaking about the Middle East, Iraq, terrorism, or WMD, let alone running for president.

Too bad some of the people posting on this blog wouldn't read some of the comments first.

It seems most are only interested in getting their opinion out there. There is no dialog or discussion it's just opinion after opinion and slam after slam.

It certainly doesn't lend to interesting reading or discussion.

They should have titled this blog The Slam Thompson and Praise Paul Forum.

And no I'm not a Thompson or Paul supporter. I am an open minded Canadian with no vote.

But from where I'm sitting it looks like America may jump from the Fat into the Fire. The comments from misinformed, prejudiced, party loyal voters will only aid in electing another incompetent President to the White House.

My greatest hope is that Americans will join together for the good of the Nation and the world. And they will vote on Candidates' competence and experience not Party lines and false impressions.

What is this man talking about. Saddam is dead and Americans aren't interested in the tale of WMD's. Now we see why he was "late" announcing his R-candidacy, he just found out Saddam is dead and no WMD's.

Fred has bumped his head and has been in bed since before the Iraq embed, HAS no clue what has been said about their capability to make a war-head.
Go back to the actors studio where you actually can impress people.

Hey people, he is right and you all are the morons.

Saddam killed several 100 thousand Kurds with those WMD's, remember? Also remember that he refused to allow weapons inspectors in to the country? (That's what guilty people do) Also, remember that the majority of people in the US were for the war in Iraq prior to going in. If I remember correctly it was upwards of 80% approval. People will probably respond and say that we were told lies. No, we were given bad info, as was our leaders. If there was proof someone lied, someone would be in jail. It is easy being an armchair QB on Monday. Hindsight, biggest mistake. But now Hill will keep us there til after 2013. It's the dems war now, no matter what Pelosi says.

Posted By JB Boston MA : October 2, 2007 8:46 am

Hey, JB guess what, guess who supported Saddam while all of this was going on….duh. Also, recall that UN inspectors were permitted in to the country and guess what they found and reported,,,,duh. We weren't lied to, our leaders had bad information, guess what JB it's their job to verify information and validate it before going off half cocked. Sure is easy to Monday morning Quarterback, that's why I said from the get go, Bush had better hope he finds his WDMs that everyone else says are NOT there anymore. As for Hillary keeping us there until 2013, she has become a realist, Bush and crew have put us in a position where we have created a vaccum in the region. No ones going to follow us home if we leave RIGHT now, however it is not in our best interst to see the region implod, nor is it in our interest to see Iran become MR stability in the region. Hope you don't bleed to much red, white and blue.

I totally agree,,I have a number of buddies in the military and supposedly when the UN stalled for Sadaam for almost a year, Sadaam used that time to transport WMDS to Syria and hide them in the desert sands. Sadaam for sure had weapons and people just cause we didnt find them did not mean he didnt have them…FRED you are correct.

Tom,

Are you one of these uber-conservatives who just can't admit when he's wrong? Let's face it, we've been in Iraq for years and have found no WMD's. None. Not so much as a thimbleful of uranium. No nerve gas, biologicals, nothing. Does this mean that there was never a program, of course not. But Saddam was not obsessed with getting the bomb. He was obsessed with keeping power, and was pretty good at it. Saddam did not need WMDs, but he did need the appearance of being capable of it in order to maintain control.

Now you're going to use the argument that Saddam was a bad person, a dictator in fact, who deserved what he got. Yes, you're right. He was a very bad man. Now he's dead, along with tens of thousands of Iraqis and thousands of American soldiers. And for what? The world is hardly safer now than it was. Face it, going to war was a BAD decision, made worse by the fact that we went it alone. I'm no apologist for Saddam, but it seems that you certainly are for George Bush.

Now we're stuck with it. How do we solve the problem? There's certainly no easy answer. I do know that we cannot afford to keep throwing money and lives away. What do you suggest?

at first it seems funny, but then you consider that most of the republican candidates, and party members in general, believe this kind of garbage. what powder keg is he talking about? if we hadn't acted, saddam would still be sitting in power over a totally oppressed country, just as he was before the invasion. not that that's a good thing, by any means, but there wasn't any of the chaos there is now. thompson either has no idea what he is talking about, or he pulled a miss teen south carolina. either way, it's not good. go back to acting, fred. just because you're old and stately looking doesn't mean you have any business running a country.

Fred's right. He has a knack for knowing where the terror is.

It's like I always say, 'where there's oil there's terrorism'.

Hopefully if he becomes elected president, we'll attack Venezuela (Iran is too powerful).

Whoah…down boy….Thompson is behind the times and the sad thing about him, is that some will actually cast votes for him.

What a country.

Yes, CLEARLY Saddam had WMDs…that's why we've found so many laying around. CLEARLY the weapons inspectors were just not good enough. CLEARLY you are a moron. I wonder if so many people would've been chomping at the bit for you to start your run if they'd known the kind of crap you'd be spouting…

Wow - too bad we didn't listen to Fred's incredible wisdom regarding Saddam's WMD's. Given his zero military service, lack of real senate accomplishmensts, but great acting skills, it is surprising that nobody heard his booming voice cry out when the time was appropriate. Anyhow, now we can be saved by Fred and his mostly content-free speaches and be assured he will be nowhere to be found or silent on issues of real substance. Of course there are many supporters of Fred that are willing to demonstarate their ignorance by stating absolute false information based on (God) knows what source of information.

Just what we need: Another tough talking el Presidento who doesn't bother to think things through before delivering his lines of red meat to the Right Wingers who never fight in the wars they hunger for.

ThirstyJon, there's a lot of talk about WMDs, and about how the WTC was actually blown up by flying saucers from the planet Tralfamadore, and about how Osama is really a Martian. Help yourself. My favorite theory is that transcendentally powerful beings of light made the WMDs invisible for a thousand years. But Atlantis is always a possibility, you know.

To David:

Saddam would be concerned about killing Palestinians? Are you kidding?

No one cares a wink about the Palestians. Ever wonder why Palestinians still live in refugee camps in Lebanon and Egypt?? Oh yeah, nobody wants them in their country! The only Arab nation to allow refugees from Palestine was Jordan, and they only took a few hundred thousand. Palestinians have been living in refugee camps for 50 years!

yeah, Saddam would really care. They'd call those who died martyrs and