Quote:
Originally Posted by Giantone  Folks what we have here is a Bush loyalist,who takes great offense at questioning of his angelic leader.The facts with times and dates have been posted to counter everything you have said,your ignorance has blinded you so all you do now is call names, fine.Bush lied and I have given you more than enough proof.  |
Okay... I guess I have to say it again.
I
.......... AM
.......... NOT
.......... A
.......... BUSH
.......... SUPPORTER!
I am loyal to defending this country. Bush gets it. Most democrats don't. But they only don't get it for political reasons. If it was Gore in the WH he'd probably be doing the same thing and you democrats would be marching right behind him. It's plain and clear when you have to reduce your rhetoric to the simplistic "Bush lied". AND, somehow you KNOW Clinton didn't lie. You seem to have a lot of knowledge of what's inside our leaders' heads.
The bottom line is this... we invaded Iraq. We did it based on what appears to be faulty intelligence (20/20 hindsight is all so convenient for those willing to cast political aspersions). You want to blame Bush for that, fine! If it was a mistake he should be blamed. I personally don't believe it was a mistake. We have one less dictator that had evil intentions and brutalized his people to deal with. I think we did the morally right thing. I don't think we did it right (the blame rests on the CINC), but we did the right thing. But to say Bush lied is just nothing more than over-simplified political nonsense. To say that he was able to dupe everyone else into believing Saddam was armed and signed UNR 1441 or the IWR is delusional. 60 Minutes provided you a first hand account of why we all believed he was still armed and you reject it only because it doesn't fit your political agenda on the matter.
There is a lot to blame Bush for, and you wont get disagreement with me on it. But you will always get a debate from me when you reduce your argument to the simplisitic "liar, liar...".