At this point I don't understand why we're arguing. I agree with this!!! I never supported Bush nor the neocons. I'm not a neocon. I think anyone who though Iraq had a nuke or a WMD is nuts.
Well I'm glad about this, but I hope you can understand the confusion which arose from your initial reply to my reply to The Conservative who had been going on about how great Bush was at 'uniting' the country after 9/11.
After your reply asking if Gore would have avoided the Iraq War, in this context, it sounds a lot like, "Bush was the better choice anyway, because his worst fuck up would have been made by Gore regardless."
So, instead of assuming that (I apologize for that; hope you can understand why I thought that, in context), let me just ask you straight out: Do you think Bush was a better choice than Gore in their election contest, using all the powers of 20/20 hindsight, having seen the consequences of Bush's presidency? It's a hypothetical.
(Perhaps, if you pretend to believe the puppet theory, you could try to argue that Gore would have made no difference. But I don't want to put words in your mouth.)