Clarification/Follow-up by tomder55 on 06/30/05 10:33 am:
I do not know why people do not believe it .Perhaps the messenger is not doing a good job. I just look for evidence and post what I find .

The power of the left ? In my view that has something to do with it . Examine the reaction to the Presidents speech and specifically to the howl of protest over his references to 9-11 .

I reject the notion that we should not use 9-11 . Did the country not rally behind "remember Peal Harbor " ? But the Democrats and the press act like he tread on hallowed ground by evoking the memory .

Here were the specific references .
He said that American troops “are fighting a global war on terror. The war reached our shores on September 11, 2001.”
He said; “After Sept. 11, I made a commitment to the American people: This nation will not be attacked again. We will defend our freedom. We will take the fight to the enemy. Iraq is the latest battlefield in this war.”
He said “The only way our enemies can succeed is if we forget the lessons of September the 11th, if we abandon the Iraqi people to men like Zarqawi and if we yield the future of the Middle East to men like bin Laden.”
He said that terrorists “are trying to shake our will in Iraq, just as they tried to shake our will on September 11, 2001. They will fail.” and
He said : “After Sept. 11, 2001, I told the American people that the road ahead would be difficult and that we would prevail. Well, it has been difficult and we are prevailing.”

All these statements are true and do not in any way exploit 9-11 for political purposes .The Whitehouse was actually taken aback by the vitriol of the reaction ,and of course the MSM played along .

I documented some of the many references I have connecting al Qaeda and Saddam ;but even if that were not the case ,can the left really claim that we are not in a battle with them in Iraq today ? Zarqwai has stated his allegiance to OBL and OBL makes no bones about the fact that Iraq is one of his battle fields against the US.

The left says things like the effort is adrift, disconnected from the reality on the ground and in need of major mid-course corrections." (Harry Reid) .ok they have established themselves in opposition ...now what ? Kerry could not answer that in the election and his last editorial piece offered nothing new. Nancy Pelosi seems to think that increasing veterans benefits will solve the problem . Joe Biden thinks that Egypt should train Iraqi police ....oh yeah ,he also thinks that NATO should send in some border patrol agents . I hope you understand the danger in announcing a time table for withdrawal ;the Democrats evidently don't .If we cross that line ,we move into the realm of defeatism. If they are looking for a time-line he spelled out a very important one ;the political progress of the State of Iraq.

I have heard not a thing that is better than the Bush announced plan of supporting a new Iraqi democratic government and to give training to a new deployable Iraqi security force . If they have a better plan then they should say so now.

Bush's braggadocio is gone ,and it has been replaced with a sobering realization that his early words about the war on terror being a long hard affair were not just platitudes .The US is succeeding in seperating the elements of the "insugency " . For the Sunni's there will be a political solution ;for the terrorists ....leave Iraq or get captured or killed.

Clarification/Follow-up by Itsdb on 06/30/05 3:10 pm:
ex,

I believe Saddam definitely had a connection to al Qaeda - there's more than enough evidence to show that, even the 9/11 commission acknowledges such. I'm not convinced he had played a role in 9/11 - but I've never argued that as a reason for going to Iraq. I'm still unclear just when Bush ever argued that was a reason.

More than anything it's been the press and the left, not that there's a difference there, that has made this Bush-9/11-Saddam connection just to destroy it - and Bush along with it.

9/11 is why we're fighting the GWOT. Iraq is a part of that war because there is no question of Saddam's twelve years of UN defiance, no question of his nuclear and other WMD aspirations, no question much of his WMD stockpile is unaccounted for, no question of his threats to the US, no question he fired on US and British planes regularly, kicked inspectors out, murdered, tortured and oppressed millions. Those were the reasons given for going and they're still valid.

That's what I believe the evidence - not the propaganda - shows.

Steve