American Elephants

If Bush lied, then so did… by American Elephant

Nancy Pelosi

So, who’s lying now?

8 Comments so far
Leave a comment

Saying that Iraq may have or even does have WMD is not the same as getting us into the mess that Iraq now is.


Now if all the reasons the White House cited as reasons for invading Iraq had turned out to be true, Busg would have come out smelling like a rose and he would have gone down in history as great.

BUT GUESS WHAT?? The truth was so far from what Americans were led to believe it is ridiculous.

If a man morgages the house to buy lottery tickets and he wins millions , he looks good but if not, the family is not doing well.

That is basically what Bush did.

If it was an honest mistake , I would say he is inept.

If he was carrying out the agenda of PNAC, he deserves to be shot.


Comment by gasdocpol

I agree there is a difference. To say that Saddam Hussein has WMD and then not do anything about it would be an egregious dereliction of duty.

As far as the reasons for going to war, they all were and remain true to this day.
1. We BELIEVED he had weapons of mass destruction and he refused to show us otherwise when the entire world demanded it of him. The rest of the world also believed that he had WMD, even France, Germany adn Russia who were opposed to the war. He even refused to cooperate fully even when our entire military was parked on his borders.
2. Saddam was a very rogue dictator who had broken every condition of the cease fire agreement, and who had violated every one of the 16 UN Security Council resolutions imposed upon him.
3. Saddam was a known supporter of terror, he gave a $25,000 scholarship to the families of suicide bombers, and his regime was having high level talks with al Qaeda. The media correctly point out that we never had evidence of “operational plans”, but the fact that his regime was talking with them, and that is indisputable, should be enough for anyone.
4. Saddam had sworn himself an enemy of the United States and vowed to destroy us numerous times. He tried to assassinate one of our presidents.
5. There is no evidence of Iraqi involvement in 9/11, but there are irrefutable ties between Iraq and the first world trade center bombing.
and finally,
6. Saddam was given a final ultamatum, cooperate fully or we will come in and make sure you are disarmed outselves. He refused even then to comply.

All of those reasons are still true, and any leader that would not remove such a completely rogue dictator who flouted the demands of the world so many times, showed he was perfectly willing to attack others, supported terrorists, and proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he was willing to use WMD, and was sworn to our destruction…anyone who would not act under those circumstances would be the inept one. Not Bush. Bush did exactly what he had to.

Something many people dont understand about intelligence, is that it is always, by its very definition, possible that it is wrong. We can never be certain what another country is doing. All we can do is make our decisions on the very best intelligence that is available. And at the time, all 16 of our intelligence agencies concurred that Saddam probably had WMD. The intelligence agencies of the rest of the world agreed. Britain, France, Russia, Germany, etc…Thats why we offered Saddam so many opportunities to cooperate and prove he did not have them. He refused to cooperate fully right to the very end. If you want to blame anyone for the Iraq war, blame him. if he had just said, ok, look wherever you want, we wouldnt be in this situation.

And please dont confuse not finding WMD with meaning there never were any. We dont know that. Several of Saddams top people have testified that they were there and were moved into Syria during the several MONTHS we wasted diddling around with UN resolutions.

As far as the “mess” that Iraq is now. Can you please show me any war (besides perhaps Grenada) that did not involve much bigger mistakes? I can think of a half dozen battles in WWII in which more soldiers died in one day, than have died in all the years we’ve been in Iraq. “War is messy”…they say that for a reason!

But thanks for your comments…. I invite you to check back, because “If Bush lied, then so did…” will be a regular feature. I will be posting dozens and dozens of quotes by Democrats proving thoroughly that it is Democrats who are and have been lying about matters of war and national security for their own political gain.

And I would hope everyone would agree that we absolutely cannot tolerate any politician who would lie about war or national security.


Comment by American Elephant

Maybe Saddam had WMD but were they militarily insignificant ?

If we were to act preemptively, we should have been 200% certain.

We ended up doing the wrong thing.

The real question that should have been asked was “IF Saddam had WMD ,was he stupid and crazy enough to use them against the country that spent more on military than the next 12 countries in the world combined.


Comment by gasdocpol

If we were to act preemptively, we should have been 200% certain.

But you cant be 200% certain with intelligence. You cant even be 100% certain. That is the nature of intelligence. Youre trying to find out things about people who dont want you to find out things about them.

We can only act on the very best intelligence we have. And the best intelligence we have said Saddam still had WMD that he was prohibited from having by international law. Indeed, as I said, several of his top people have testified since that he did have them, and he moved them into Syria while we were wasting time with the security council.

But youre forgetting the most important point. He was also REQUIRED by international law to cooperate fully and prove he had no WMD. Bush gave Saddam the choice to cooperate fully and avoid war. Precisely because we couldnt be 100% certain.

Saddam refused again.

Anyone who would not act under those circumstances would be guilty of egregious dereliction of duty.


Comment by American Elephant

Saddam WAS cooperating. He let the weapons inspectors in and they were not finding anything. The weapons inspectors only left when Bush was getting ready to bomb Iraq.

I REPEAT Before doing a preemptive strike ,you had better be VERY certain. Otherwise anyone can perceive danger and use that for a pretext for attacking another country.

Bush was carrying out the agenda of PNAC and used the pretext of Saddam having WMD for the invasion. The advisors of Bush either lied or were very stupid.

The Senators who trusted and supported Bush were wrong to trust and support Bush but that is hindsight.


Comment by gasdocpol

You need to reed Hanz Blix’s reports to the UN again. Saddam was NOT cooperating fully as he was required to do by international law. Sorry, you’re just wrong.

And dont make me laugh. You dont have any idea how the Senate or Congress work, but I can ASSURE you, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton and all the other Democrats who voted for the war (the vast majority of Democrats DID vote for the war) did not do so because they were “trusting Bush”

1) they saw all the intelligence with their own eyes and made their decisions based on it
2) There are separate, bipartisan, unanimous reports that have interviewed everyone involved, and have ALL concluded unanimously that NO ONE LIED. They are the 9/11 Commission report, the Senate Selact Intelligence Committee Report, the Robb-Silbermann Report, and the Lord Butler Report in England. And again, they were all bipartisan, or nonpartisan, and even the Democrats on the committee agreed unanimously that NO ONE LIED.

That is the very point of these “If Bush Lied, So did…” posts. The fact of the matter is that since no one lied about the intelligence, and it can be demonstrated that no one did, then it necessarily follows that Democrats ARE lying now.

Democrats are the ONLY ones who have lied about the war.


Comment by American Elephant

When Gore and Obama came out clearly and unambiguously against the Iraq invasion , were they lying too? Are you saying that they really thought that we should invade Iraq?


Comment by gasdocpol

nancy needs to just shut up becuse she doesnt know anything whats going on in iraq or afganistan


Comment by chris

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: