Will the Bushies Ever Accept the Truth???

[MrFun]

No, not world conquest.

[Alexander's Horse]

The fact remains that the Bush Administration obsessed about Iraq and that this was a huge distraction from the war on terror. Going after Saddam Hussein had little or nothing to do with 9/11.

[Bosh]

Originally posted by MrFun
No, not world conquest.

Conquest of what then? Saddam's army was too weak to control of all of Iraq after Persian Gulf I, let alone go attack anyone else.

[GePap]

The question rah is whether the amdinistration misled the public about its preparations for warmaybe there are people like you who think this was just "finishing the job", but unless you can show that group made up the mayority of war supporters, he charge that Bush gave misleading reasons for the war stands as valid.

[rah]

Originally posted by GePap
The question rah is whether the amdinistration misled the public about its preparations for warmaybe there are people like you who think this was just "finishing the job", but unless you can show that group made up the mayority of war supporters, he charge that Bush gave misleading reasons for the war stands as valid.

The lack of across the board uproar, (despite the continued fanning of the flames by the anti-bushies) leads me to believe that there a heck of alot more people that feel that way they you're willing to admit to. And yes, there is no way to prove that, but it fits the my model so I'm comfortable with it.

[GePap]

I would posit a mayority of Americans, for reaosn beyond me, want to give the amdin. a pass cause they do not like the other possibility-0that they were dupped. Also, they buy the whole "Iraq as part of the war on terror" bit-possibly becuase Iraq is full of Arabs and Muslims, so it must be part of the war on Terror.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Too often people assume that a brutal dictator is incapable of rational action or thought, despite decades of evidence to the contrary. Hussein may have been murderous. He may have been brutal. He was not, however, so out of touch with reality that he thought he could win a war with the United States.

He sure did the first time around.

The difference is, we don't have to.

Sucks to be him.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

WRT being duped why then would the admin authorize and encourage transparency by allowing, no supporting, Woodwards efforts to uncover the story.

I would also pose that a number of Americans despite lack of evidence of complicty with AQ recognized that Saddaams overtures to Hamas and paying suicide death benefits/bounty made him an ally of terrorism.

[PLATO]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
I would also pose that a number of Americans despite lack of evidence of complicty with AQ recognized that Saddaams overtures to Hamas and paying suicide death benefits/bounty made him an ally of terrorism.

Ooooh! Don't remind the liberals of that! It destroys way to much of their argument to make this fun!

[GePap]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe

I would also pose that a number of Americans despite lack of evidence of complicty with AQ recognized that Saddaams overtures to Hamas and paying suicide death benefits/bounty made him an ally of terrorism.

RIGHHHHT Cause most American knew that-OOPS, NO.

The President barely ever mentioned Hamas or Palestinian sucide bombers-it was all about Saddam giving WMD's to AQ.

The record of speeches by the admin. has far far more referenmces to Ansar Al-Islam than Hamas, cause that angle did not pan out. The depressingly high numbers of people polled who think Iraq was involved in 9/11, (probably the same folks who think WMD's were found) do not support this claim.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Boshko

Conquest of what then? Saddam's army was too weak to control of all of Iraq after Persian Gulf I, let alone go attack anyone else.

Given the mood among many members of the UNSC to lift sanctions, it's fairly likely that Saddam was hoping for the opportunity to do a little shopping and restocking. He'd never be much of a threat, but simply being an ongoing pain in the ass while sitting on top of half the world's oil is good enough for me.

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
WRT being duped why then would the admin authorize and encourage transparency by allowing, no supporting, Woodwards efforts to uncover the story.

I would also pose that a number of Americans despite lack of evidence of complicty with AQ recognized that Saddaams overtures to Hamas and paying suicide death benefits/bounty made him an ally of terrorism.

Consider what happened the last time an administration didn't cooperate with Woodward.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Hey you lib guys are the ones that say he had no terrorist ties.

Powell could not use that piece to support his case in the UN precisely because of the anti-Israel slant the UN is notorious for.

As for Joe Q. Public not knowing this little tidbit, I think you far underestimate.

As for speaches made, 'member these were speaches not only to American public but as a forum to entice world support. No world support could ever be expected were Hamas to be invoked.

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat


Consider what happened the last time an administration didn't cooperate with Woodward.

Agreed which is why they decided to be transparent.

[rah]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe
As for Joe Q. Public not knowing this little tidbit, I think you far underestimate.

I have to agree. I've even seen the drunks in the bars toss this tidbit out during arguements.