If no WMD found; will Bush be made out to be a liar?

[connorkimbro]

But you can't prove that they do exist either...

That's not the same thing as bush being a liar, now, is it?

[Elden]

Originally posted by Darius871
True. So if it can't be proven either way, nobody is a liar.

They haven't found any - untill they do he will be considered a liar. Besides if they don't find any they will place there own and "find" them making themselves look like they aren't liars even though they are.

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Elden

They haven't found any - untill they do he will be considered a liar.

...by people that already don't like him. Millions will either think a) just because we don't find them, doesn't mean they didn't exist and/or b) it was all about liberation anyway. These aren't my views, but they will be very popular and will probably save Bush from any political consequences at home.

Originally posted by Elden

Besides if they don't find any they will place there own and "find" them making themselves look like they aren't liars even though they are.

I'm as suspicious as the next man, but it's pretty illogical to assume that if they are found, he's a liar, and if they aren't, he's a liar. Why even bother having this discussion if you're that incorrigible?

The nature of what is found should show whether or not it was 'planted'.

Another question: if they don't find anything, and don't plant anything, why wouldn't they have planted some weapons just to vindicate themselves? They're already liars anyway, right? In other words: if no WMD are found, and no WMD are planted, then they weren't liars, because liars would have no compunction at all about planting some.

[Elden]

Originally posted by Darius871
I'm as suspicious as the next man, but it's pretty illogical to assume that if they are found, he's a liar, and if they aren't, he's a liar. Why even bother having this discussion if you're that incorrigible?

Only if they take ages and the rest of the world is getting po'ed at America lying will a mysterious find be/seem false.

[Darius871]

Fair enough.

[uh Clem]

Originally posted by connorkimbro
if WMD isn' found, then bush is a liar?

false. use logic. just because WMD's exists doesn't mean we will successfully find them.

my wallet exists, but i bet you couldn't find it, even if you went to my room to look for it. Hell, half the time even I can't find it, and it's my damn wallet!

I dealt with this in an earlier post, conner. The lying was in Bush's repeated use of "We know he's got them", or some such formulation. Obviously, he did not know, so his statements were made with either (a) deliberate intent to deceive, or (b) reckless disregard for whether they were true or false.

Bush also lied last September, as I mentioned, when citing an International Atomic Energy Agency report that said that Iraq was six-months away from getting the bomb. Of course, there was the technicality that no such IAEA report ever existed.

This fraud was exposed within days, although it was not widely reported in the ultra-leftwing, Bush-hating American news media.

Let's not forget Colin Powell's citing of the "splendid" British intelligence report, which turned out to be mostly a rewrite of a magazine article taken from somebody's post-doc thesis (without the author's knowledge and 12 years out of date).

Again, this was exposed within days, long before the fighting began.

And too funny for words were the documents that showed Iraqi agents were shopping for uranium in Niger. Forgeries, as it turned out, and very bad ones too. This fraud fell apart immediately.

"The CIA made me do it" argument doesn't wash BTW. The major complaint of intelligence agents for the past year and a half is that their superiors are demanding more "pro-war" intelligence, whether the facts justify it or not. Their objectivity is being compromised.


* * *


To repeat: if anyone wants to argue that Bush was justified in lying, that he had a higher purpose that required misleading the public (but for for a good cause), then say so.

But don't tell me that he wasn't lying, because then you've simply lost touch with reality (although you might be well-positioned for a job as rightwing radio talk show host).


Edits: typos

[Darius871]

Originally posted by uh Clem

If anyone wants to argue that Bush was justified in lying, that he had a higher purpose that required misleading the public (but for for a good cause), then say so.

Originally posted by Darius871

Originally posted by Edan To me, a country that fails to abide by the conditions of a cease-fire agreement agreed to by both sides is a reason to war. (Not necessarily always a good one, but a reason)

That's the case I wish they would have made all along, but we both know the American people wouldn't have supported a war unless they were convinced Iraq posed some sort of threat.

Can't speak for the other cons here though.

[DAVOUT]

@uh Clem

I cant agree more.

It will be interesting, next time M. Bush starts a preemptive war, to see how people will react to the reasons motivating the war.

[Vandal-1]

It seams that we are not really clear on what we are looking for other than the WMD application,Chemicle or Bio I think nuclear is now out of the question.

[Ned]

uh Clem, et al., they have found a portable bioweapons lab. The pictures were on MSNBC. Also there are reports that a lot of weapons were moved to Syria and buried in Lebanon. Finally, why were the Iraqi soldiers so well equipped with chemical weapons gear?

There is enough smoke here to suggest that Bush had at least some intelligence that Saddam was continuing his banned WMD programs.

Asside from the Syrian angle, the biolab and the Iraqi soldier gear are undeniable facts. Uh Clem, et al., do you agree?

[GePap]

A biolab: you mean a lab in which growth cultures can be created? You mean like those to be used for germ weapons? Or for research, or perhaps for agricultural or pharmacological purposes? You mean a lab that is of possibly Dual use? Certainly it is suspicious that the Iraqis would need a mobile lab for non-suspiciious acts, but given the realities of pre-war assumptions, were everyting done by the Iraqis was always seen in the worst possible light, why make the same mistakes now?

As for chem gear, obviously they needed it when the had chem weapons. But having chem gear was nevr banned. Why then get rid of protective chem gear at all?

Also there are reports that a lot of weapons were moved to Syria and buried in Lebanon.

But not credible reports. Why the hell would they have to be burried in Lebanon? are there inspectors there or something?

[Harovan]

To have equipment against chemical weapons doesn't mean, that the own side will use them and even has them, but that there is the opportunity that the enemy will use them. I had anti chemical weapons gear too in my active time, although the German army doesn't have chemical weapons.

About the biolab, well, this doesn't prove there are biological weapons, does it? It may have been used to begin with their development, or even for other purposes. It may be illegal (not sure about this), but it's certainly not yet a smoking gun. May be future investigations can provide more facts.

[GePap]

On the "weapons moved out of country" aspect:

If that were true, it makes Bush a second type of liar: according to Bush, this war was needed to protect Americans from these weapons, and their ability to get into the hands of terrorist. If these weapons got out becuase of the war, then the war failed to protect us form these weapons getting into the hands of terrorist, and perhaps made the situation worse, which would he the opposite of what the Bushies said this war would acheive vis a vi WMD's.

Is that a better lie?

[DAVOUT]

Ned should be more cautious : he will probably be quoted as a reliable intelligence source proving beyond any doubt that WMD were buried in Lebanon, when M. Bush will inform the American people that he has decided to invade Syria.

[Pax]

Originally posted by connorkimbro
if WMD isn' found, then bush is a liar?

false. use logic. just because WMD's exists doesn't mean we will successfully find them.

my wallet exists, but i bet you couldn't find it, even if you went to my room to look for it. Hell, half the time even I can't find it, and it's my damn wallet!

If your father installed surveillance cameras in your room and your mother arranged for your brothers and sisters to go in and inspect to find your wallet. I think your wallet could be located successfully in your room.