70% believed Iraq was connected to 9.11; and quite frankly, you don't impress me as someone who's smarter than 70%. 70% believed there was a connection because that was the impression planted by the Bush administration.WTF? Both sections 1 and 2 were required to authorize military force; and section 2 included those who were involved in 9.11.they did not make Iraq being behind 9/11 "one of the two reasons" to go to war. Try finding documentation
SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.
(a) Authorization.--The President is authorized to use the Armed
Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and
appropriate in order to--
(1) defend the national security of the United States
against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and
(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq.
(b) Presidential Determination.--In connection with the exercise of
the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President
shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible,
but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make
available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the
President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that--
(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or
other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately
protect the national security of the United States against the
continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to
enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council
resolutions regarding Iraq; and
(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent
with the United States and other countries continuing to take
the necessary actions against international terrorist and
terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations,
or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the
terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.
http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-107publ243/html/PLAW-107publ243.htm
Your welcome.
Read "1" then read "2." Do you know what 1 and 2 are? They are sequential. They are two different authorizations for the use of force. 2 is not a clarification of 1. Jesus, you people are un...freaking...believable
Irrelevant to everything. You already said you are so incredibly stupid that you thought at the time Hussein was behind 9/11. You are, a clown. But who am I telling. That was hillarious, that you thought Saddam did 9/11. What a bozo
And no, not irrelevant. It's there in plain English ... the invasion of Iraq was consistent with "those nations, organizations,
or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the
terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001."
Let me ask you, are you at least 30 so you actually clearly remember that time? And if you are, tell the truth. Think back. You seriously thought Iraq was behind 9/11? I realize you trapped yourself, but you are talking to people who were adults during that period and we actually remember that time. The Bush administration was not and did not make the case to the public Iraq was behind 9/11 any more than FDR made the case that Switzerland was behind Pearl Harbor. They just didn't. RKM and I are not reading history and parsing words, we clearly remember it