Two Plus Two Older Archives  

Go Back   Two Plus Two Older Archives > Other Topics > Politics
FAQ Community Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #91  
Old 08-26-2005, 05:28 PM
Autocratic Autocratic is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: D.C.
Posts: 128
Default Re: Iraq War (a few facts)

Of course, this was mostly based on poorly constructed, shoddy evidence, which we were spoon-fed before the war.

"Slam dunk"!
Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 08-26-2005, 05:29 PM
xniNja xniNja is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 474
Default Re: Iraq War (a few facts)

None of things you mentioned are WMD's.. (Weapons of Mass Destruction)

You're right that it's fair to point out most of the world believed Hussein had weapons pre-Bush, but then you should be equally fair in pointing out that the UN inspectors, independent auditors, and CIA agents involved in determing whether or not it was true, all came up negative- but that didn't stop Bush from blatantly lying about it to garnish support quickly.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 08-26-2005, 05:30 PM
Roybert Roybert is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 4
Default Re: Iraq War (a few facts)

[ QUOTE ]
It is fair to point out, though, that everyone, even the french and germans (and every prominent US Democrat), believed that Saddam had the WMD before the invasion, and before Bush even came to office.

[/ QUOTE ]

But the UN weapons inspectors, on the other hand ...
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 08-26-2005, 05:32 PM
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default Re: Iraq War (a few facts)

[ QUOTE ]
It is fair to point out, though, that everyone, even the french and germans (and every prominent US Democrat), believed that Saddam had the WMD before the invasion, and before Bush even came to office.

[/ QUOTE ]

I love how diehard Republicans like to say things like this, as if it excuses Bush's lies about WMD, as if he didn't have special access to intelligence that France, Germany, and prominent Democrats were not privy to.

And, if it really was just a big mistake on Bush's fault that he wasn't at all culpable for, why did he go forward with nominating Bolton when he was responsible for part of the intelligence screw-up?
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:28 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.