bruce, bruce, bruce, you are so damn full of it!

take this one:

No, we only know that by the time we did invade, MONTHS later, after trying to get a UN consensus, they were not there. You do not know whether they were where Rumsfeld knew at the time he said he knew.

The problem, Bruce, is that Rumsfeld said he knew where the weapons were nine days before the fall of Baghdad, well AFTER we invaded. No months went by. No Iraqi troops had any time to hide stocks of weapons after he said this, because they were engaged in active combat against US forces in that region until their defeat only days later. If Rumsfeld had been right, he'd have captured vast stockpiles of weapons...except that they weren't there.

In fact, even Rumsfeld has admitted he was wrong and that he should not have said he knew where the weapons were.

In September, he finally said, essentially, "I should have said I believed they were there, not I knew they were there," which is just a cowardly way to say "I was wrong."

Also, Bruce, you love to spout the deluded bullshit that we were still at war all along because all there was was a ceasefire. If that were the case, why did President Bush ask Congress to authorize the use of force? Surely if he was commander in chief of a force that Congress considered to be STILL AT WAR, he would not have to ask Congress for this.

In the United States, it is Congress, not the president, and not some document signed two administrations ago with Iraq, that decides whether we are at war.

In this case, Congress passed this authority to the executive, but Congress never claimed that the Gulf War had never ended. That bizarre contention just shows your desperation, buddy.