Reply #54: It's really too bad...

[sendero]

... when you can get more accurate information on an internet message board than on TV.

I realize that PBS has garnered a certain amount of respect, but clearly the program you saw was wrong. And frankly, PBS has been under pressure, as has NPR, to become more "balanced". Telling one side's truth and another side's lie is not balance.

Many experts, people who had been there a long time, said point blank that there were no weapons (Scott Ritter) and many others said they highly doubted that there were (Hans Blix).

Frankly, I think a lot of people thought there MIGHT BE some weapons, but you don't go to war on a MIGHT BE.

I honestly don't think Americans at the time cared that much either way. The polls showed overwhelming support for the war. Those who live by the inattentiveness of the American people are sure to die by their vindictiveness when promises made (of a quick painless victory) are not kept.

(And BTW, I'm aware that Bush** has often said this would be "tough", etc - but that was against a backdrop of "this will be a slam-dunk" posturing. As usual, you cannot judge Bush** on his words, you have to take them in their context (such as - he never said Saddam was involved with 911 but he implied it over and over and over))