Well, I had a list of Democrats and their opinions on WMD and it seems to have made the mod mad.
All calls for a cite are now moot. I did and it got locked.
Point being that the politicians, all of them IMO, are full of it.
What is the point of the rants from the opposition party about the in power party when it is clear that they do not have a gimpy leg to stand on? IMO.
I don’t really care about part politics, but I am amazed at the number of folks who believe what the politicians say and then flood the world with rhetoric that is meaningless.
Of course this is just my opinion.
You posted a long glurge, added nothing of your own. I told you as much before I closed it, didn’t I? This thread, in fact, would be better suited for MPSIMS(where I shall now move it), since it is neither a light debate or a poll. Please read the forum descriptions.
To address the OP: many politicians may believe Saddam Hussein’s Iraq had some WMDs, but only one inflated the issue into something big enough to start a war with.
It’s like the difference between a security guard watching someone carefully because he looks suspicious, and pre-emptively shooting him dead because the guard thought he had a gun.
GunsNSpot
I never accepted Dean’s idea that any Dem who voted for the war was wrong.
You see THE PRESIDENT said that Iraq had WMDs and was a threat to the US. Either directly or indirectly by providing WMDs to Al Quada or other terrorist qroups.
So, given that, they have no reason to believe that the PRESIDENT is a liar.
Untill after we invade and the WMDs are not there and the terror connections are not there.
So we turn back to the PRESIDENT and he says, well the CIA said it was there, and after the world is better with Saddam gone, you wouldn’t argue that would you?
We’re not arguing that. The dems are saying that the PRESIDENT said there were WMDs and there are no WMDs.
If the President came to congress and the American people and said, Well Saddam is just plain mean to his people, let’s invade. Do you think the congress or the country would support an invasion? Hell no!
So we need to find out.
Was the CIA just really off the mark on Iraq?
Did the administration pressure the CIA to make the claims they did?
So the fact that the Dems simply believed the President and the CIA doesn’t make it party politics that they want answers now.
And right here we have a fine example of just that:
And Czarcasm’s opinion notwithstanding, I think this is better suited to the Pit. The same place I move every other political rant (no matter how meaningless the rhetoric) which I run across in MPSIMS.
