Quote:

Posted by Whomod, Jan 28, 2004:
Just as an aside, when is Bush going to offer a retraction of his incorrect comments:


Quote:

George W. Bush, from the opening weeks of the Iraq war, when mobile labs were first found, prior to their being swept clean of evidence:

"We found the weapons of mass destruction. We found biological laboratories. You remember when Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said, Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons. They're illegal. They're against the United Nations resolutions, and we've so far discovered two. And we'll find more weapons as time goes on. But for those who say we haven't found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they're wrong, we found them."



http://www.whitehouse.gov/g8/interview5.html






Oh no, he just makes wild assertions which he presents as FACT and tosses them into the air. If they're found out to be false, then they re-spin it to something resembling "WMD-related programs" rather than saying he was wrong.

I beleive I was accused of presnting my opinion as fact a couple of posts up. Hell, these guys do it on an almost daily basis!





As already answered repeatedly, that was a statement he made in full belief that a smoking gun had been found. And it was only later after a full sweep of the mobile labs that it was found not to be the smoking gun, that Iraq's captured mobile labs were initially believed to be.

I believe Bush has made more than enough acknowlegement of this.


Quote:

Posted by Whomod, Jan 29, 2004:
Lies lies lies, yeah ah.

Most likely delivered by Slick Cheney.





This and the other unproven charges, which you allege as fact, are small footnote technicalities, which David Kay in his Senate hearing today even acknowledged to be a failure of intelligence, not deception by Bush to mislead the country into war.

Once again, the big picture...
  • Saddam's genocide of an estimated 1 million of his own people,
  • Saddam's prior pursuit and possession of WMD's,
  • Saddam's use of WMD's on Iranians and his own people,
  • Saddam's documented secret WMD program to again obtain WMD's (whether or not he had successfully done so at the time if the March 2003 invasion),
  • Saddam's defiance of the 1991 peace agreement,
  • Saddam's non-compliance with U.N. weapons inspections,
  • Saddam's defiance of ten U.N. resolutions calling on Saddam directly to disarm, the last voted in September 2002, just 6 months before the U.S. invasion, calling on Saddam to disarm and submit to inspections, or face "severe consequences",

...ALL speak of of a threat and justification for invasion that Bush-hating head-in-the-sand liberals choose to ignore.

Again, the Congress and Senate get largely the same constantly updated intelligence the White House gets, and if they were "misinformed" (as Democrats after-the-fact allege) in their vote to authorize an Iraq invasion, it is THEIR idiocy, and not the President's deception.

Again, prior to the Iraq invasion, virtually everyone in the White House, Senate Congress, the U.S. intelligence community, and foreign governments, including Hilary Clinton, John Kerry, and the prior Clinton administration, had ALL argued for regime change in Iraq, and all argued that there was an emerging threat in Iraq.

Blaming the intelligence failure on Bush, in an act of slanderous liberal revisionism that ignores the facts, to try and trash Bush, is deliberate manipulation of the truth for pure and simple self-serving (and divisive) political purposes, attempting to smear Bush.

David Kay said in his Senate hearing today that regardless of the WMD's not being found (specifically answering Sen John Warner) that although he believes it unlikely at this point, WMD's could still be found.

I'm envisioning the F-16's that were found buried in the sand.
And Iraq has a lot of sand.

Kay also said that regardless of WMD's not being found, clear evidence was found that Saddam Hussein was still in clear breach of the U.N.'s prohibition of WMD's, having a clear WMD program in place, ready to begin WMD production as soon as weapons inspectors would have left.
And Kay said that it was absolutely the right thing for the U.S. to do, to go in and remove Hussein, and that the world is absolutely a safer place with Hussein removed from power.

What you raise, again and again, Whomod, are technicalities that ignore the big picture.

And you also ignore that Libya has surrendered its nuclear weapons program, as a direct result of U.S. invasion of Iraq.
An imminent threat that we didn't even know existed, until Libya revealed and surrendered it.
Which, for me, destroys the credibility of wrongheaded liberals who just hate Bush and want to trash him, no matter what the facts, and say there "was no evidence of an imminent threat."

Saddam wanted WMD's. If he didn't have them already, he would have gotten them sooner or later, if not deposed by the U.S.
And given the examples of Libya and North Korea, probably a lot sooner than shrill liberal rhetoric trying to slander the President would like us to believe.