# Bush says nobody needs to be accountable **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [January 16, 2005, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042 "2005-01-16T18:00:04Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![LouisB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/dfb087/32.png) [@LouisB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LouisB)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/21 "2005-01-16T21:00:26Z")
> [@](#): > > anything he does is correct and proper To Brutus, this is a true statement. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 9:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/22 "2005-01-16T21:01:17Z")
> [@Johnny L.A.](#): > > I don’t understand your logic here. The issue is that Bush justifies his bungles by saying that since he was elected, then that means anything he does is correct and proper. I don’t care if he won with 100% of the votes. No. You are starting with the presumption that he has some long list of bungles, and he thinks they were magic’d away with the election results. The other (and correct) view is that the people can see the same action as being correct or incorrect, and the election results show that more people believe the actions were correct. > [@](#): > > He is the Commander-In-Chief, and that makes him responsible for his actions. I don’t think you’ll find any argument on that point. Where you will find argument is when his actions are wrongly labeled as ‘bungled’ or whatnot. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/23 "2005-01-16T21:10:03Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > No. You are starting with the presumption that he has some long list of bungles, and he thinks they were magic’d away with the election results. No magick dude, obviously the American people refused to hold him accountable. Or, rather, 51% of the voters did. > [@Brutus](#): > > The other (and correct) view is that the people can see the same action as being correct or incorrect, and the election results show that more people believe the actions were correct. Yes, but those who see the actions as being correct are incorrect. (duh). How was it correct for Halliburton to overcharge us on gasoline? How was it correct to cherry pick intel? How was it correct to staff delicate positions with college grads just because they were Republicans? How correct was it to… Living in a dream world doesn’t make you right. Bush fucked up. And now it’s go-time. Are you loyal to your nation and the world, or to your Leader? > [@Brutus](#): > > I don’t think you’ll find any argument on that point. Where you will find argument is when his actions are wrongly labeled as ‘bungled’ or whatnot. This is binary. 1) He meant to do good but fucked up, and thus bungled. 2) He didn’t mean to do good, and aimed for this hell. Either way, your Leader fucked up. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/24 "2005-01-16T21:12:08Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > No. You are starting with the presumption that he has some long list of bungles, and he thinks they were magic’d away with the election results. The other (and correct) view is that the people can see the same action as being correct or incorrect, and the election results show that more people believe the actions were correct. So: [ul][li]You think that Bush was correct in conflating Al Qaeda with Iraq?[/li][li]You think that Bush was correct to rush to war in Iraq before the UN search for WMDs was complete?[/li][li]You think Bush was correct to ignore intelligence that contradicted evidence of WMDs in Iraq?[/li][li]You think that Bush was correct in starting a war _before_ all of his forces were in place?[/li][li]You think that bush was correct that Iraq posed a serious thread in spite of the fact that the CIA gave him a report saying that Sadam Hussein would _not_ be a threat unless attacked?[/li][li]You think that the Bush Administration is correct in fearmongering among the American public?[/li][li]You think that it was more important to persue the non-thread of Iraq than to persue Al Qaeda?[/li][li]You think it’s okay that the C-I-C can claim that whatever he does is right, simply because he was elected by just over _half_ of the people (and to hell with the other 49%)?[/ul][/li]Sounds like a ‘long list of bungles’ if you ask me. ---
**Author:** ![matt\_mcl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ab992/32.png) [@matt\_mcl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/matt_mcl)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/25 "2005-01-16T21:23:24Z")
[QUOTE=Johnny L.A.] So: [list][li]You think that Bush was correct in conflating Al Qaeda with Iraq?[/li][/QUOTE] I don’t think that was a bungle. I’m pretty sure he meant to do that. ---
**Author:** ![MrFantsyPants](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7ba0ec/32.png) [@MrFantsyPants](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrFantsyPants)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/26 "2005-01-16T21:25:37Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > …the election results show that more people believe the actions were correct. prove it! those results could just as easily prove that the majority of americans don’t give a fuck how many brown people die in their name, as long as we keep them homosexuals from gettin married. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/27 "2005-01-16T21:28:18Z")
I’m waiting for someone who voted for Bush to join the rest of us in condemning this statement. Friends of Dubya, you don’t have to say you hate the man. You don’t have to agree that he’s a lousy president and an embarrassing excuse for a human being. You don’t have to say you’re having doubts about your “man”. Just admit he said an INCREDIBLY FUCKED UP thing this one time. Please? I have a hard time believing that no one from the Pro-Bush side can do this one little thing. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/28 "2005-01-16T21:41:50Z")
> [@Johnny L.A.](#): > > You think that Bush was correct in conflating Al Qaeda with Iraq? Golly, but I do love your loaded questions. There were proven contacts between the two. Both were a threat. > [@](#): > > You think that Bush was correct to rush to war in Iraq before the UN search for WMDs was complete? ‘Rush to war’? Damn, is H.Dean whispering these in your ear? Regardless, yes. If anything, I fault him for going to the UN in the first place. While the UN does a fine job with certain international regulatory bodies, when it comes to matters of war, they are useless gaggle of bueracrats, and GW should have known. > [@](#): > > You think Bush was correct to ignore intelligence that contradicted evidence of WMDs in Iraq? I don’t know that he ‘ignored’ _any_ intel on the matter. And in the given situation, it is better to err on the side of caution. > [@](#): > > You think that Bush was correct in starting a war _before_ all of his forces were in place? What forces came in after? We couldn’t control the not-so-bright move by the Turks to block the 4ID, and it seems that yes, Iraq did fall, so I don’t really know what you are talking about. (Unless this is a varation on the ‘We need more troops!!!’ theme) > [@](#): > > You think that bush was correct that Iraq posed a serious thread in spite of the fact that the CIA gave him a report saying that Sadam Hussein would _not_ be a threat unless attacked? They also gave him reports that SH was spanking out WMD left and right. > [@](#): > > You think that the Bush Administration is correct in fearmongering among the American public? :rolleyes: > [@](#): > > You think that it was more important to persue the non-thread of Iraq than to persue Al Qaeda? We stopped persuing Al Qaeda? News to many people, I am sure. > [@](#): > > You think it’s okay that the C-I-C can claim that whatever he does is right, simply because he was elected by just over _half_ of the people (and to hell with the other 49%)? Unequivocal _yes_. Hell yes. GW made election promises; _We_ expect him to keep them. _You_ expect him to turn himself to war crimes trials. You guys are entertaining some sort of fantasy that unless he bows to _your_ will, he is obviously a wrong, since only your view can be right. Besides, it’s not like he turning blue staters into soylent green. Yet. > [@](#): > > Sounds like a ‘long list of bungles’ if you ask me. You, and the rest of the American electorate, were asked. It’s just that a certain percentage is still in denial about the answer. > [@MrFantsyPants](#): > > prove it! > > those results could just as easily prove that the majority of americans don’t give a fuck how many brown people die in their name, as long as we keep them homosexuals from gettin married. You keep on keepin’ on, **MrFantsyPants**. With ideas like that floating around on the Left, I am stunned that you guys keep losing elections! > [@monstro](#): > > I’m waiting for someone who voted for Bush to join the rest of us in condemning this statement. Only because your views on the matter are so prejudice that you cannot comprehend that the other side is right. Common mistake for lefties. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/29 "2005-01-16T22:03:56Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > Golly, but I do love your loaded questions. There were proven contacts between the two. Both were a threat. There were a _couple_ of contacts that lead to nothing. This is enough to link Iraq with the WTC attacks? :rolleyes: > [@Brutus](#): > > ‘Rush to war’? Damn, is H.Dean whispering these in your ear? Regardless, yes. If anything, I fault him for going to the UN in the first place. While the UN does a fine job with certain international regulatory bodies, when it comes to matters of war, they are useless gaggle of bueracrats, and GW should have known. ‘Might makes right’, eh? We’re all for law and order, until it’s inconvenient for _us_. Even though the UN Charter expressly forbids wars of aggression, we can decide that it doesn’t apply to us? > [@Brutus](#): > > I don’t know that he ‘ignored’ _any_ intel on the matter. And in the given situation, it is better to err on the side of caution. To err on the side of caution would be to _not_ go to war! > [@Brutus](#): > > What forces came in after? We couldn’t control the not-so-bright move by the Turks to block the 4ID, and it seems that yes, Iraq did fall, so I don’t really know what you are talking about. (Unless this is a varation on the ‘We need more troops!!!’ theme) The military said it would be unwise to attack Iraq until there were more forces in place. If war was necessary, then more time should have been allowed to position the forces. But then, that would allow the UN inspectors to complete their jobs and discover that Iraq had no WMDs. Can’t have that! Better to rush into it, than to risk being shown to be in error! > [@Brutus](#): > > They also gave him reports that SH was spanking out WMD left and right. Nevertheless, they said that SH would not use them unless attacked. > [@Brutus](#): > > :rolleyes: So you _do_ think that the government should use fear to manipulate people. > [@Brutus](#): > > We stopped persuing Al Qaeda? News to many people, I am sure. It’s like the _South Park_ bit with SH. ‘Hey guys! Look over there!’ Or _Wag the Dog_. We couldn’t find bin Laden, so SH suddenly became a priority. It’s a shell game that over half the AMerican public fell for. > [@Brutus](#): > > Unequivocal _yes_. Hell yes. GW made election promises; _We_ expect him to keep them. _You_ expect him to turn himself to war crimes trials. You guys are entertaining some sort of fantasy that unless he bows to _your_ will, he is obviously a wrong, since only your view can be right. He _is_ obviously wrong. Just because he was re-elected does _not_ mean that he bears no responsibility for the errors he has made. Oh, I forgot. The **only** error he’s made was appointing a certain minor person to some post. :rolleyes: > [@Brutus](#): > > You, and the rest of the American electorate, were asked. It’s just that a certain percentage is still in denial about the answer. Once again… It’s not about whether he was elected. That’s undisputed. It’s whether he should take responsibility for his actions. He has said, as quoted in the article, that he will _not_ take responsibility for his actions. This can only be described as cowardice. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/30 "2005-01-16T22:05:34Z")
Here’s what I posted in the other “accountability” thread. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5725384&postcount=40](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=5725384&postcount=40) Bush and company expect people to blindly believe him, fight for him, so on and so forth, but does not have the grit to take ownership of what he created. Two faced, lying, worthless coward. He’d be first in line to take all the credit so why not the blame? ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/31 "2005-01-16T22:07:44Z")
> [@RTFirefly](#): > > “Buck, buck, buck? There **is** no buck.” - George W. Bush Why does this sound so…_poultry_? 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Reeder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/c6cbf5/32.png) [@Reeder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Reeder)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/32 "2005-01-16T22:08:26Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > You’ll be singing a different tune one February 1, when peace breaks out, and happy dancing Iraqi’s shower our troops with garlands of flowers, in gratitude for their newborn democracy. Have a little FAITH man! 😉 You do realize that the actual Iraqi government, whichever is “elected” doesn’t take over till Jan 1 2006 don’t you? ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/33 "2005-01-16T22:08:53Z")
> [@Johnny L.A.](#): > > So you _do_ think that the government should use fear to manipulate people. That is not what ‘roll eyes’ mean, you know. Or don’t know, it seems. > [@](#): > > He has said, as quoted in the article, that he will _not_ take responsibility for his actions. This can only be described as cowardice. Now you are just making stuff up. Rules against that, you know. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/34 "2005-01-16T22:12:43Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > Golly, but I do love your loaded questions. There were proven contacts between the two. Both were a threat. Proven? [WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Colin Powell reversed a year of administration policy, acknowledging Thursday that he had seen no “smoking gun [or] concrete evidence” of ties between former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ID/3909150/) > [@Brutus](#): > > ‘Rush to war’? Damn, is H.Dean whispering these in your ear? Was it not Rumsfeld who said that we go to war with the army we’ve got and not the one we want? If we went without armoring all our humvees, that indicated some sort of rush, or urgency in time. The whole idea was that we couldn’t wait, remember? > [@Brutus](#): > > Regardless, yes. If anything, I fault him for going to the UN in the first place. While the UN does a fine job with certain international regulatory bodies, when it comes to matters of war, they are useless gaggle of bueracrats, and GW should have known. Should have known better than to attempt to win global support for our illegal and unjustified war? If you say so. Why is it that so many of those who support Bush don’t realize that we can’t beat global terror if we don’t have allies? > [@Brutus](#): > > I don’t know that he ‘ignored’ _any_ intel on the matter. And in the given situation, it is better to err on the side of caution. [How soon could Iraq acquire nuclear weapons? In his Oct. 7 speech, the president claimed that “if the Iraqi regime is able to produce, buy or steal” weapons-grade fissile material, “it could have a nuclear weapon in less than a year.” But the judgement of the intelligence community is that Iraq could not produce such material until the last half of the decade.](http://www.crocuta.net/CIA.htm) There, now you know of intel he ignored. > [@Brutus](#): > > What forces came in after? \(Unless this is a varation on the ‘We need more troops!!!’ theme) People in the adminstration and who’re prosecuting this war have said we need more troops. Rumsfeld said that we went to war without all of our vehicles being armored because sometimes you fight with the army you have rather than the one you want. This indicated urgency. I’ve already disproven any reasons for urgency. Can you please condemn Bush’s actions now? > [@Brutus](#): > > They also gave him reports that SH was spanking out WMD left and right. Cite? > [@Brutus](#): > > We stopped persuing Al Qaeda? News to many people, I am sure. News to you at least. [“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.” - G.W. Bush, 3/13/02]([http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/11/13\_Laden.html](http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/11/13_Laden.html)) Again, now that I’ve removed your ignorance, can you admit that Bush has fucked up? > [@Brutus](#): > > You, and the rest of the American electorate, were asked. It’s just that a certain percentage is still in denial about the answer. Um… asking the american electorate doesn’t negate reality ya know. They’re still blunders even if 51% of voters cram their fingers into their ears and walk to the polls singing “La la la, I can’t hear you, la la la, everything is great, la la la, Bush is doing fine, la la la…” So, really, the people who’re in denial about the answer are those who claim Bush is doing a good job. > [@Brutus](#): > > You keep on keepin’ on, **MrFantsyPants**. With ideas like that floating around on the Left, I am stunned that you guys keep losing elections! ~sighs~ Have you seen statistics? “moral values”? The anti-gay ammendments? A great many people **were** willing to vote for someone based on their stance on gay marriage. But, the propaganda of an unformed Bush voter will sway the dems and help them win more elections, eh **Brutus**? > [@Brutus](#): > > Only because your views on the matter are so prejudice that you cannot comprehend that the other side is right. Common mistake for lefties. You’re not right. Common mistake for you. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_L.A](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_l.a/32/1084_2.png) [@Johnny\_L.A](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_L.A)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/35 "2005-01-16T22:13:57Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > That is not what ‘roll eyes’ mean, you know. Or don’t know, it seems. The implication was that you did not believe Bush was fearmongering. He was and is. > [@Brutus](#): > > Now you are just making stuff up. Rules against that, you know. No I’m not. > [@](#): > > President Bush said the public’s decision to reelect him was a ratification of his approach toward Iraq and that there was **no reason to hold any administration officials accountable** for mistakes or misjudgments in prewar planning or managing the violent aftermath. ---
**Author:** ![monstro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba9def/32.png) [@monstro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/monstro)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/36 "2005-01-16T22:14:45Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > Only because your views on the matter are so prejudice that you cannot comprehend that the other side is right. Common mistake for lefties. The “other side” may very well be right, **Brutus**. They may be right about the righteousness of the war. They may be right about all the other shit I disagree with. But for me, I can look at Bush’s quoted statement in the OP apart from everything else and see 100% wrongness. Bush could be Christ Himself, and that statement’s ludicrousness would still stand out in stark relief. This isn’t about his blunders, past, present, or future. This is about the nauseating hubris apparent in this one little quip: > [@George Dumbya Bush](#): > > [There is] no reason to hold any administration officials accountable for mistakes or misjudgments in prewar planning or managing the violent aftermath. Defend this. Explain to me, the prejudiced person that I am, why no administration officials should be held accountable for the very real mistakes that have occurred during Bush’s reign. Why should they be cloaked in a shroud of infallibility and impunity while the underlings they are responsible for overseeing get dragged in the media? Isn’t it the administration officials who are responsible for making the tough decisions? Why should they get the glory of all the successes but reap no consequences for their failures? If Iraq turns out to be a success, will it not be Bush and his administration who receives all the praises? Why then, when the mistakes and horrors continue to churn up from this quagmire, do they suddenly not deserve the scorn? What will it take for you to admit to yourself that the war was mistake? Can you even fathom that it could be, or are _you_ too prejudiced to conceive of the possibility of that the US can be wrong, just like any other country. Explain this to me, if you can. ---
**Author:** ![Hyperelastic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/a3d4f5/32.png) [@Hyperelastic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hyperelastic)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/37 "2005-01-16T22:22:49Z")
A lame duck shouldn’t quack too loudly. There are plenty of proverbial duck hunters out there with proverbial loaded shotguns, and some of them are Republicans. ---
**Author:** ![SteveG1](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bb73d2/32.png) [@SteveG1](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SteveG1)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/38 "2005-01-16T22:28:21Z")
Brutus, to add just a little item, there was fearmongering. Much of Bush’s campaign was a promise to protect us from the Bad Guys. Cheney, probably with Bush’s blessing, gave us that Vote for us or die snippet. We have met the Enemy and he is us. ---
**Author:** ![Brutus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/91b2a8/32.png) [@Brutus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Brutus)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/39 "2005-01-16T22:29:53Z")
[QUOTE=FinnAgain] Proven? [WASHINGTON - Secretary of State Colin Powell reversed a year of administration policy, acknowledging Thursday that he had seen no “smoking gun [or] concrete evidence” of ties between former Iraqi President Saddam Hussein and al-Qaida.](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/ID/3909150/) “I have not seen smoking gun, concrete evidence about the connection, but I do believe the connections existed,” he said." > [@](#): > > There, now you know of intel he ignored. No, there I have an reprinted Op-Ed piece from the Hartford Courant. > [@](#): > > People in the adminstration and who’re prosecuting this war have said we need more troops. Rumsfeld said that we went to war without all of our vehicles being armored because sometimes you fight with the army you have rather than the one you want. This indicated urgency. I’ve already disproven any reasons for urgency. You have disproven nothing. For one, it’s not like we could go in in the middle of summer. As it was, we probably should have gone in a few weeks earlier, but there you have it. As for the Humvees, they are being armored. Even we don’t have infinite resources, so it is a bit foolish to expect Rummy to wave his defense-rod and Presto! they will all be armored. > [@](#): > > Can you please condemn Bush’s actions now? No. > [@](#): > > Cite? Sure. Notice that isn’t some Op-Ed piece I am trying to foist off as a ‘cite’. [Cite.](http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5129314/) > [@](#): > > At one of those sessions in December 2002, the CIA listed evidence of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction. Unsure that Americans would find the information compelling, Bush turned to Tenet. “It’s a slam-dunk case,” Tenet replied, according to a recent book by Washington Post reporter Bob Woodward. No weapons have ever been found. > [@](#): > > News to you at least. > [“I don’t know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don’t care. It’s not that important. It’s not our priority.” > > - G.W. Bush, 3/13/02]([http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/11/13\_Laden.html](http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/2002/11/13_Laden.html)) Bin Laden is Al Qaeda? Who would have thunk it? You are just showing the all too common lefty penchant for ‘feel good’ actions (get Bin Laden and call it quits). The fight goes on. > [@](#): > > Again, now that I’ve removed your ignorance, can you admit that Bush has fucked up? You have done nothing but imply that Bin Laden is Al Qaeda. > [@](#): > > ~sighs~ Have you seen statistics? “moral values”? The anti-gay ammendments? A great many people **were** willing to vote for someone based on their stance on gay marriage… And leaving out the little ‘brown people’ quip that was made? Tsk tsk. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [January 16, 2005, 10:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042/40 "2005-01-16T22:37:53Z")
> [@Brutus](#): > > No, there I have an reprinted Op-Ed piece from the Hartford Courant. …Sure. Notice that isn’t some Op-Ed piece I am trying to foist off as a ‘cite’… This has a really nasty implication, which you are content, thus far, to leave floating in the air like after pulling your uncle’s finger. Are you saying the quote is bogus? But you use the same quote in rebuttal. Are you saying that because the quote is used in an opinion piece, that renders the quote unreliable? Or are you trying to slither in an innuendo that a contrary poster is engaging in dishonest rhetorical devices? You can speak plainly, this is the Pit, after all. A subdued and respectful apology is in order here, friend **Brutus**. You can do it, I have every faith in you. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/bush-says-nobody-needs-to-be-accountable/285042.md?page=3)