Comments on: Study: False Statements Preceded War

By: TexasFred

TexasFred — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:49:08 +0000

Sue, it’s a speculation on my part, and not all that far fetched actually, sounds as good as all the other bullshit floating out there, because for damn sure there were NO WMDs and our own Senate and Congress said Saddam had NOTHING to do with 9-11…

So, can you think of any other reason??

By: Bluebonnet Sue

Bluebonnet Sue — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 20:17:40 +0000

GUYK, I agree with you. There’s too much emphasis put on being politically correct…not only in Iraq but here at home. I’m sick of it!

As for the report, just “follow the money.” Who funded it makes a lot of difference especially when there are those who will swallow what is said without question just because it is touted as being from an “independent organization”. I do agree that what matters is whether it’s true or not. I’m waiting for some rebuttal…but not holding my breath.

Also, I would like to know where to find the documentation that GW went to war because he was angry that Saddam threatened his daddy? If that is an assumption or speculation, then that is no better than what took place in getting us into the war in the first place.

NO… I am not a Bush Bot.

By: TexasFred

TexasFred — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 09:05:30 +0000

Ed Morrissey is a bigger Bush Bot than Gayle and Amy put together…

And as Ranando said, if it’s true, who cares where the funding came from, if it’s NOT true, debunk it…

I don’t see anyone doing any major debunking at the moment…

No 9-11 involvement, no WMDs that threatened us, oh, but wait, that study group was the U.S. Senate and Congress, a Republican controlled Senate and Congress, when we still had them, so, ya know, maybe it IS all just a left wing attack on a wonderful person and brilliant President… (/sarcasm)

By: Ranando

Ranando — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:09:58 +0000

Who cares who funded it?

Is it true?

By: Bloviating Zeppelin

Bloviating Zeppelin — Thu, 24 Jan 2008 01:01:03 +0000

Before everyone runs off screaming, you might want to take a peek at Ed Morrissey’s Captain’s Quarters:

George Soros Funded Study Says Bush Lied
The AP reports, and the New York Times expands, on a new study by a supposedly “independent” organization that claims to have assembled hundred of “false statements” by the Bush administration in the course of the Iraq war. However, the Center for Public Integrity hardly qualifies as “independent”. It gets much of its funding from George Soros, who has thrown millions of dollars behind Democratic political candidates, and explicitly campaigned to defeat George Bush in 2004.

By: Verlin Martin

Verlin Martin — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:44:10 +0000

The problem with the report is that I could make a report like this and show ANYONE to be lying

They took what we know now and retroactively ‘proved’ that someone lied about it THEN.

Saying something you believe (that turns out to not be true) is not the same as lying.

By: TexasFred

TexasFred — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:03:44 +0000

Bob, I posted that here on the blog a while back, that had we actually ‘mined’ Saddam would he have not been a decent ally, not one we could trust but an ally none the less, and we have a hell of a lot of allies that we can’t trust, so it wasn’t at all out of the equation…

By: BobF

BobF — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 15:33:18 +0000

I’ve always wondered? If after Desert Storm we had tried to bring Saddam around to our way of doing things instead of isolating him, would things have turned out different during the 90’s and into today? He was defeated and we just packed up and left him his own devises.

By: TexasFred

TexasFred — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:27:35 +0000

Bob, no doubt, there was faulty intelligence, and yeah, Clinton didn’t just not act ON it, he was one of the major causes OF it, he and his bitch destroyed the Intel services and damn near destroyed the services…

And the aftermath was the problem, personally, I have NO problem with taking out Saddam and his bastard sons, but we didn’t go to Iraq to nation build, we didn’t go to bring about Iraqi freedom, we went to take out Saddam because little Bush was pissed off that Saddam had threatened big Bush, plain and simple, it was a temper tantrum, and many in upper echelon ranks advised Bush to NOT do this, that it was going to be a very bad mistake, but he didn’t listen, and thus, the aftermath, mismanaged and still going on, 5 years of death, destruction and wasted U.S. tax payer dollars…

By: BobF

BobF — Wed, 23 Jan 2008 14:17:29 +0000

All through the 90’s, Bill Clinton said Iraq had WMD’s. We launched cruise missiles in 98 at suspected suspected targets that were producing chemical weapons. A good part of the intelligence the Bush Administration and our allies had was turned over to them by the Clinton Administration. All during the 90’s we deployed as part of a Tanker Task Force to Saudi Arabia and Turkey in order to contain Iraq. We were briefed on their chemical and biological capabilities.

http://www.cnn.com/ALLPOLITICS/stories/1998/12/16/transcripts/clinton.html

Here in 1992 we have Al Gore chastising Bush 41 for ignoring Iraq’s ties to terrorism and WMD’s.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JE48XHKG64

Going into Iraq and ousting Saddam isn’t the problem. The problem is what took place after we defeat Iraq and how the occupation was conducted. We saddled our troops with ROE’s that if your local dog catcher had, your neighborhood would be over ran with dogs. We displayed weakness to a people that only respects strength.