NO! Chemical weapons in Iraq???

[Alex]

If they didn't shoot him, then the analogy isn't quite apt. Also, yours was an expansion on mine in which he was shot.

But it really doesn't matter. You've switched from arguing justification to arguing responsibility. They aren't necessarily the same thing. However, since the justification Bush gave for the war turned out to be wrong I would argue that he has none. And while you may not be responsible for the results of a justified act, I would say you generally are responsible for the results of an unjustified one.

Again, he could have put himself on solid, in my opinion, grounds for pressing the war but chose not to because they didn't think they could sell it successfully. Instead they overreached and presented a version of events that I honestly believe they believed to be true because they knew it would sell better. But in doing so they put themselves onto more tenuous ground and just end up looking silly flailing about for any handhold when that ground gave way under them.