Sorry so long but there is so much on how this war was rigged. These analysts did not receive the same ethical standards treatment by the media outlets and were not questioned on their connections. They echoed Bush admin talking points and served as a group of attack dogs to counter anyone who dared to say anything contrary to what the Whitehouse and Rumsfeld wanted known. Some now have come open and say they regret what they did but at the time feared losing access and status and money if they bucked the system. One even did get fired for saying on Bill O'Reilly's show that we were "not on a good glide path" regarding progress in Iraq. There is even more on this and it should disgust any citizen of this country. In the end this is the result: French and German intel= right; David Kay and Hans Blix= right; Joe Wilson=right; Richrd Clarke=right; Bush and Rumsfeld=wrong. They listened only to what they wanted to hear and disregarded all else. Gross incompetence or criminality, you pick. Either way we still messed up.

and the French let the State Dept know this prior to the war; German intel debunked "Curveball" the Iraqi defector whom much of the case against Iraq was based (the Germans held this man in the late 90's and branded him a pathological liar and Bush still used him); and we all know the publicity campaign that was used against the French and the Germans basically insulting them, and we all know what the Bush admin did to Wilson and Plame; acting Insp Gen Thomas Gimble testified to the Senate Armed Services Committee in 2/07 that Douglas Feith (Bush appointee to Pentagon who served as policy chief there) ran "innappropriate" interference b/t the intel staff, the Pentagon, and the Whitehouse in making the case against Iraq and the now disproven link between Saddam and al Queada-this contradicts Powell's assertion as it was not low level intel officers but high level appointees improper influence; David Kay and Hans Blix both stated that the charges were false against Iraq (from their first hand knowledge); cont.

I hope you are still looking at this thread. I have been under the weather. We can parse hairs all over the place but that fact remains we did not attack Germany until they declared war on us. As for Bush, I have to say I would agree with you if he truly made the best decision without any pre-judgement. But what we now know supports the notion that he knew better and that Iraq was a false war for geo-political reasons, and here is why: Powell stated in 2005 that his words to the UN were "a blot" on his record and that he had "never seen evidence to suggest" a tie between Saddam and al Queada (at the time he blamed lower level intel analysts for the miscues); Richard Clarke who was with Cheney in the bunker on 9/11 stated that from that day it became policy to tie Saddam with the attacks; the Downing Street memo (and 7 other ones) all stated about the Bush admin: "intel facts were being fixed around the policy" on Iraq; Joe Wilson debunked the yellow cake/Niger theory; French intel supported Wilson's findings (continued)

If you're going to look at perspective, you can't look at the 12/7/41 and afterwards, you have to look at the events leading up to it.

Since we want to declare what is justified and not, how about the embargo we placed on Japan for oil and steel which forced them to abandon diplomatic efforts and attack us. How about the shipments of war materials to GB despite the fact we were declared neutral. Didn’t our policies invite the attack from Japan and because of alliances and our not so neutral stance result in the declaration from Germany? Plenty of people in that era were opposed to war and felt it wasn’t justified. The bottom line is that justification can be made for or against any action but the president has to make a decision based upon the information available to him at the time. At the time Bush made the decision to go into Iraq, the evidence presented by Colin Powell justified it.

I will deal with the comment that what did the Germans do to deserve being fought against. On 12/11/41 the German govt declared a state of war against the US in support of Japan's actions on 12/07/41. I think that falls in the area of reasonable cause. As for the argument that being against the Iraq war is somehow devoid of military perspective or against the troops..well that is plain junk. One can support the troops and be against the geo-politics that caused the war and/or are continuing it. I do not hear people rail against the Afghanistan war which was justified. Iraq did not attack us on 9/11 and it did not have the weapons as was used to justify declaring war on it. Plain and simple. And just about everything I read about the war there is that it has made matters much worse in the region, not better. And that includes info gleaned from our own govt sources.

To the contrary; I read and completely understood your letter. There is no apology expected or desired from you. It’s unfortunate you don’t understand the military even after being married to a military man. There are plenty of historical examples of people like you who thought that our fight for independence against the British was “ill conceived” – in fact many of these people actually assisted the British army while we were fighting for our independence. In all of the other wars and skirmishes we have been involved with, there have been people like you who want to pick and choose what is a “justified” war or avoid it altogether. You say the war against the Germans was justified – how so?

America is also an impatient and spoiled brat in many respects. The support for going into Iraq was higher than the current movement against it. But because it wasn’t over in five minutes, people like you started whining about it. Also, since you’re such an expert on warfare, tell us what the proper equipment and capable leadership was you say was missing and what your qualification is for making those assertions.

In every war since the beginning of time their has been some who consider it to be ill-concieved!!! This letter here is from grandparents who sent their grandson off to war and Yet I did not detect the same bitterness you constently spew about this war. I as a veteran of 20 yrs an proud of the young men and women who choose to fight terrorism and do what is right to defend this country. These men and women make this decision on their own and fully have my suoopet ant the support of most veterans. Their will always be those who feel war is not the answer but sometimes you are not given a choice and this was one of those times.

Watchdog great letter way to go fellow vet, these young men and women choosing to defend this great country fully deserve our admiration and respect and their decision should not be doubted like Kate is implying.

I knew there would be folks like you who failed to read what I wrote; therefore, I will repeat it. We are in an "ill conceived war" with no easy way out. A war that a majority of Americans, as well as the rest of the world, feel was/is unwarranted. A war waged without a plan, without proper equipment, and without capable leadership. Worst of all, a war which seems comparable to the mess we created in Vietnam. To think otherwise seems naive. Fighting the British for independence and fighting the Germans in WW11 were justified, though war should always be the last resort. Regardless of what you say or how you may feel about the war, or my thoughts on it, rest assured my stance is firm and I offer no apologies.

"very imprudent to do so at this time"

Are you saying that serving in the military is imprudent as long as there is a risk that the Soldier, Sailor, Airman, or Marine might die?

Just what we need, people in the military who are only in it for the college education. I had a Sailor with your mentality desert when my ship was deployed after 9/11 and then cried like a little baby when he was brought back to the ship. Fortunately, we have people who understand the risks and are willing to serve and put this country ahead of their own self serving interests. If we had followed people with your thought process Kate, we would still be under British rule, or would be known as the United States and the Confederate States, or would be speaking Japanese or German right about now.

I have to ask: Why did your grandson join the military while we are involved in an ill conceived war with little or no reason to believe we will be able to pull out any time soon? I mean, with all due respect, there are many more ways to serve our country than joining the military. If it was for the benefits, including education, it simply is a bad risk. My husband retired from the Navy after nearly 30 years, so I am not opposed to military service. It's just that it seems very imprudent to do so at this time.

It is not always the parents or the grandparents that influence a child's decisions. Sometimes its the bus driver we ride with 25 miles each way, every night, back and forth to work. Sometimes its the things we learned in school that weren't exactly on the curriculum or on the SOL's. Sometimes its the books we have read or the things we have heard said. Regardless, we don't come back the same as we were. So Moms and Dads; Grandmas and Grandpas; the decision was ours and we don't come back the same. We will never be your little boy or grandson anymore. We pay our dues and learn what it means to have freedom, by losing it. Wish us well on our journey and welcome us home, not as heroes, because we now know better; but as a "new person" who now has earned and deserves your respect and the freedom our country grants us. My dad knew what I now know and you will as well. After he passed, my mom told me he cried the day he drove home from leaving me at the induction center.