What a Cruel World

[linwood]

You still don't get it. Weapons of mass destruction was just something to get you Liberals on board. IT WAS A DISTRACTION! Best thing about it, it worked. Iraq is a staging ground for the Iran war, nothing more, nothing less. Just as the stimulus bill was nothing about anything but a pet project fest. We where in such a hurry to pass the bill that we did not have time to even read it. AIG bonuses anyone? If we where in such a hurry, why after all this time is 90% of the money not stimulating anything right now? Why did we not get to read the bill on the internet like Obama promised before the vote? It's all taxation without representation. No side has the moral high ground.

Trust me I get.
I got it when it happened, every time it happened.

It seemed you were the one making a case for the WMD.

Perhaps I misread your post.

 

[Reverend Rick]

It seemed you were the one making a case for the WMD.

Perhaps I misread your post.

Nah, that was all smoke and mirrors. The truth be told, no one knew for sure what Saddam had. It was an old score and a strategic move, not to mention lucrative for Cheney and stabilizing for the oil industry.

 

[J Bryson]

Reverend Rick, you're sounding like the villain in a spy movie tying the hero to a deathtrap right before he walks out of the room.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Reverend Rick, you're sounding like the villain in a spy movie tying the hero to a deathtrap right before he walks out of the room.

LOL, I guess I am just beyond posturing any more. Both sides are immoral and selfish. There are no good guy's here.

 

[Frostbyte]

The WMD angle was not a gimmick. Putin's intelligence, the 9/11 commission, Lord Butler investigation and the Senate Intelligence Committee all said Bush was not lying. He was informed that there were in fact WMD's there. Even if the information was faulty, it's not a lie, and it's not a front for and ulterior motives.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

The WMD angle was not a gimmick. Putin's intelligence, the 9/11 commission, Lord Butler investigation and the Senate Intelligence Committee all said Bush was not lying. He was informed that there were in fact WMD's there. Even if the information was faulty, it's not a lie, and it's not a front for and ulterior motives.

Since you obviously aren't going to admit that the WMD angle was just a smokescreen, I have to ask - why didn't Bush listen to the intelligence that ran counter to the invasion?

 

[Frostbyte]

Since you obviously aren't going to admit that the WMD angle was just a smokescreen, I have to ask - why didn't Bush listen to the intelligence that ran counter to the invasion?

Bush was told by four different independent sources that Iraq had WMDs. How is that a smokescreen?

Examples of the intelligence?

 

[eugenius]

The WMD angle was not a gimmick. Putin's intelligence, the 9/11 commission, Lord Butler investigation and the Senate Intelligence Committee all said Bush was not lying. He was informed that there were in fact WMD's there. Even if the information was faulty, it's not a lie, and it's not a front for and ulterior motives.

Fair enough, so why did they invade the country?

 

[Frostbyte]

Fair enough, so why did they invade the country?

Because they believed there were WMDs in the country, and a connection to 9/11. It was part of the overall war on terror.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Bush was told by four different independent sources that Iraq had WMDs. How is that a smokescreen?

Examples of the intelligence?

Not that you have any intention of even considering it, but here's one link: U.S. Intelligence and Iraq WMD

If you really want to educate yourself, just Google up "WMD Intelligence Reports". I barely got more than a quarter of a million hits. Not enough to sway your patriotic loyalty to Lord Bush, but some people would consider that significant.

Try to avoid the Heritage Foundation and Faux News - they MIGHT be slightly skewed.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Because they believed there were WMDs in the country, and a connection to 9/11. It was part of the overall war on terror.

Because they manipulated the intelligence to support their intentions to invade Iraq, knowing full well that there was an excellent probability that there were no WMD's.

It was part of the overall war on the US Constitution.

 

[Sunstone]

Because they believed there were WMDs in the country, and a connection to 9/11. It was part of the overall war on terror.

Wow! That takes me back to the good old days when people thought a president and vice-president wouldn't lie about such an important matter. Thanks for the trip down memory lane!

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Wow! That takes me back to the good old days when people thought a president and vice-president wouldn't lie about such an important matter. Thanks for the trip down memory lane!

Ah yes!! Those heady days of having faith that a sitting President actually cared more about the health of the country than about having his own party retain power.

Back then, some people would consider it "crass" to sacrifice soldiers' lives for a trumped up war. Now, such an idea seems "quaint" - doesn't it?

 

[rojse]

Ah yes!! Those heady days of having faith that a sitting President actually cared more about the health of the country than about having his own party retain power.

Back then, some people would consider it "crass" to sacrifice soldiers' lives for a trumped up war. Now, such an idea seems "quaint" - doesn't it?

What about Vietnam?

 

[Frostbyte]

Because they manipulated the intelligence to support their intentions to invade Iraq, knowing full well that there was an excellent probability that there were no WMD's.

did the also manipulate Blair and Putin's evidence?

 

[The Voice of Reason]

What about Vietnam?

Vietnam was a collossal mistake in its own right. No question about that.

Vietnam was NOT manufactured as a way for the Democrats to retain power.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

did the also manipulate Blair and Putin's evidence?

Let me get this straight.

You are now telling us that America relies on Russian intelligence to determine whether or not it is appropriate to go to war.

Yea - that sounds about right, for the Bush administration. Of course, you then have to question the patriotism of everyone that opposes such a brilliant strategical move.

 

[Frostbyte]

Let me get this straight.

You are now telling us that America relies on Russian intelligence to determine whether or not it is appropriate to go to war.

Yea - that sounds about right, for the Bush administration. Of course, you then have to question the patriotism of everyone that opposes such a brilliant strategical move.

No I'm telling you that there are four sources that all say Bush did not lie. They had reason to believe that Iraq was in the position of WMDs based off evidence from internal and external sources. They made a decision based on the best information they had.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

No I'm telling you that there are four sources that all say Bush did not lie. They had reason to believe that Iraq was in the position of WMDs based off evidence from internal and external sources. They made a decision based on the best information they had.

Okay. Show me the links to the four sources that say Bush did not lie.

Your last claim, that they "made a decision based on the best information they had", is a distortion of reality. Their decision was based on the cherry picked, intentionally distorted half truths that could be misconstrued to support their preconcieved conclusions.

Read the following link, if you dare question Lord Bush, and the neocon doctrine of Manifest Destiny: Trapped by a Mindset:  The Iraq WMD Intelligence Failure

 

[OmarKhayyam]

All right let’s get this Bush lied stuff straight. And then FORGET IT! He is in TX never to seen or heard from again – we hope.

Remember the scene in Casablanca when the Nazi is quizzing Rick about why Rick is there and not in America?

Nazi: Just why ARE you here?
Rick: I came to Casablanca for the waters.
Nazi: (sarcastic) Casablanca is in the dessert.
Rick: (mock indignation) I was mis-informed!

Now we all know Rick has no interest in “waters” in Casablanca or anywhere else. But the excuse is just enough to protect him.

So with Our Glorious Leader. He was "mis-informed." He chose to use to read and to publish that intell that favored a course he had decided on BEFORE he was even nominated. See NRO online Bill Krystal early in 2000. (If they still have it up.) There is a column of his praising Bush as the man with the “vision” to see that Sadam was a menace. The neo-cons KNEW he would start a war if he could that is why they supported him.

So no, he didn’t lie – exactly. He just mis-lead the country and ignored facts that were “inconvenient.”