Looks like Saddam was still looking to be a threat to the region. Maybe the Bush administration wasn’t totally truthful, but thank God this guy is no longer a threat (as the liberals would have left him.)
I was with you up to that last paranthetical bit.
What exactly did they tell the truth about? It’s late, and I’m not thinking too clearly, but I can’t think of a single goddamned thing that they told us the truth about. Uranium? -no. Nukes? -no, Anthrax and smallpox? -no. Sarin, VX, and mustard? no. Long range missiles? -no. UAV’s? -no. Threat to the US? -no. Threat to the region? -no.
These things were all claimed to be certainties. Now they try to justify the invasion with the weasel-lines like “officials now say they believe”? Why the hell should anyone care what these lying wankers now say they “believe”? They’re just trying to construct some political cover for the scum they work for.
Mass graves?
Did you read the article, Hydro?
From your cite:
**
Seems to me all you’ve got is yet more scaremongering after the fact.
Sounds like “clutching at straws” to me.
Honestly, the only people on the planet who deserve to be trusted whatsoever regarding ANYTHING to do with Iraq prior to Gulf War 2003 are… ummm… yeah… ummm… I’ll get back to ya.
Look, the way I see it is this - regardless of the strategic position Iraq holds at geographic level in the Middle East, the bottom line is that Iraq is awash with oil. And everybody wants to get some degree of influence on the place in some capacity. Some will do it covertly, and others openly. And if it means diving into revisionist history to achieve that end, they’ll do it. No one’s hands are clean when it comes to Iraq. Not for 25 years.
I’m not going to trust any news regarding the build up to Gulf War 2003 for a long, long time. No matter where the news comes from.
Well they’d have got that info from Amnesty, Human Rights Watch and all them other liberal organizations.
Just 25?
THAT’s what all you conservatives were peeing your pants over last February? You truly are a noble breed. :dubious:
Only liberals care about mass graves, and they don’t.
Just let me know when the conservative pundits start calling for invasion and rebuilding of the Congo. Then I’ll believe that the mass graves were a true reason we went to war.
And thank God we no longer called him ally and gave him WMDs, as the conservtives under Reagan did.
This is old hat.
I’d say that the current admin would be highly delighted if we all got bored with debunking their propaganda.
That way their message would then become the default reality.
The only suprising thing about this thread is that hydro actually came back and posted twice.
I don’t know guys; I think that you are being a bit unfair to the OP. I for one (as a Liberal) wanted nothing more than for Saddam Hussein to stay in power. Hell, I used to get big old boners just thinking about the way that he was oppressing his people.
When you think about it, it really is simple. Liberals are just evil and wrong 100% of the time. Get with the program people
What we have here hitches pants is a serious terminological breakdown. “Liberal” used to mean one thing, then Karl Marx was born.
I thought Liberals didn’t generalize. Or was that only when their boytoy was the Big Man on Campus?
I’m not technically a liberal, but I found this funny. So… Bush’s own officials have interpreted evidence that, after the fact, would support their initial much questioned interpretation of evidence? Pull out your crayons and color me convinced.
Yes!
YES! by God!!
Finally someone gets it!
