I'm a Bush supporter. If Clinton had taken out Saddam Hussein 4 years ago, 6 years ago, 8 years ago, I certainly wouldn't have raised any fuss. If he had used WMD's as his reason, it would have made not the slightest difference to me whether any were found afterwards or not.
I think most supporters of Bush's actions probably feel the same way. This was something that needed to be done, period.
What your post reveals is that you think that for supporters of this war, Saddam Hussein was not the real issue, Bush was.
Wrong. It's the real issue for you, perhaps, and for those who think like you. Had it actually been Clinton who went in and did this, no doubt the real issue for you would still not actually have been Saddam Hussein, it would have been Clinton, what this would do for Clinton, how the Democrats could benefit from doing this.
But that's not so for those of us who believe Hussein needed to be removed from power, regardless of who was in the White House and pretty much regardless of how they framed their justification.
I support Bush because he showed the determination and the tenacity to do the job. I did not support doing the job simply because Bush was the one doing it. |
