Here's an Iraqi General who would beg to differ. Of course, I'm sure there are those of you who will simply disregard his opinion.
I have always felt it was a very a realistic probability that Iraq's WMD went to Syria and that some, or all of them were used in the attempted 2004 terrorist attack on Jordan that has oddly been forgotten about.
Funny how the mainstream media and the Bush haters forget about certain events that don't fit there agenda, isn't it?
6 comments:
Six: Of course the issue of Bush "lying" is independant of the existance of banned weapons. But if we do find evidence that people like Tom and Nadir will accept that such weapons did exist there as of 911, will you and I get to say that Howard Dean "lied"? Now that I think about it, who would we get to accuse of lying? As of the time that the senate voted on giving Bush war powers, who was it that was saying that Iraq's baath govt was complying with the terms of the 1991 cease fire? Virtually nobody was claiming that.
Nadir says, "Bush was told" (love that passive voice) that the invasion would result in a protracted guerrilla war against the US by fighters who would also fight each other, and therefore "knew" or "should have known" that this would happen. But also "he was told" by others that the post Huessein enviornment would adopt democracy rather easily. So who should he have believed? Well, that first camp of doomsayers also insisted that:
1. The invasion itself would lead to many thousands of US troop deaths, and would include use of those banned weopons by Hussein that these peacenicks now claim didn't exist, and obviously so to everyone prior to the invasion. This didn't happen.
2. The first Iraqi election would be a disaster, marked by low turnout and massive violence. This didn't happen (Nadir, do you still explain this by claiming that people voted only to avoid retaliation from US troops?).
So Tom and Nadir expect Bush to have beleived these naysayers who got so much wrong. Abe Lincoln also had plenty of naysayers. Sometimes they were right, and sometimes they were wrong. Ike had so many naysayers about the Normandy invasion that he typed-out his resignation letter. Had Hitler listened to Rommel and moved the bulk of their troops north to Normandy, Ike may very well have submitted that letter. Would Ike have been any stupider?
The liberation of Europe, Asia, and the Confederacy did take longer than the liberation of Iran (and Afgahnistan). But those faster wars killed more civilians and troops, and destroyed more property.
"liberation of Iran"?
You're jumping ahead of yourself, Paul. Don't invade Iran just yet. You don't have the troops.
I appreciate Larry Elder for bringing this general's story out of the closet. We know that Elder is a non-partisan observer who doesn't seek any political advantage for his party...
So if this guy knows that the WMDs were moved, what evidence does he have? Just like we asked prior to the invasion, if Bush/Blair were aware of evidence that the UN inspectors didn't know about, why didn't they make that intell available to the IAEA and inspectors?
Why were the Brits accusing Bush of sexing up the evidence in the Downing Street memo?
So where are these weapons? And does it really matter? You guys got the invasion you wanted anyway. Iraq is in ruins and Haliburton and Lockheed Martin are making their fortune anyway, so why do you care?
Why are you guys and Uncle Larry bothering to continue defending this war and the lack of evidence? You got what you wanted. You killed thousands in Iraq and stole their oil and got the American taxpayer to finance that and the ongoing conflict.
Why not sit back and rest on those laurels? Iraq is obviously better off than it was 3 years ago, and so are the oil and weapons industries, right?
What's the point of continuing the conversation?
Wait... maybe we should invade Syria and find out where the weapons are...
What do you think guys? Can we get the money from Congress for that?
Six,
The general is not disputing that Bush lied; he's merely arguing that it's impolite to point it out in war time. with a civil war on his hands, do you think this character is going to risk pissing off his masters?
As for WMD, his secretary of state, former treasury secretary and several high-ups in the CIA have all claimed that Bush cherry-picked data and manipulated intelligence. How can you guys think the "Bush lied" thesis is the invention of the "liberal media" or Nadir and me? Hell, the NYT ran the bald fabrications of the discredited Chalabi on the front page every day in the run up to the war.
Being patriotic does not mean submitting to the lies of presidents. Quite the opposite.
Tom and Nadir: Bush would have enough troops to liberate Syria and Iran if he could just recruit all of those straw men that you guys keep animating.
Tom: neither Six nor I believe that patriotism requires people to buy into the lies of their presidents. Also, I not only am not a patriot, I oppose patriotism. I absolutely oppose the acitons of my nation's officials when they violate my own priciples, which luckily for me are enshrined in the founding documents of the nation into which I was born. I am sad for the bulk of humanity, which is handed nothing like that at birth. At least though, as humans, they do have the US constitution, bill of rights, and declaration of independance as starting points, something most humans in history lacked altogether.
Nadir: Six and I did not want Iraqis to die (except those who would deny freedom to others) or their structures to fall. And we do not believe that the US government, or Americans organized as oil companies, have taken over Iraq's oil reserves, or intend to; nor do we want this to happen. I agree that vast areas of Iraq are worse off now than before, but I cannot blame bush for the destructive acts of people who have used the downfall of a tyrant as an opportunity to erect new tyranies.
Okay, but Six posts a lot of stuff basically implying that if the "appeasers" would just shut up, the neocons could take care of business and sort out the world's problems. Which is, of course, a load of bollocks.
Post a Comment