Bush cant handle the truth

[eg420ne]

In one of the most intellectually incoherent major speeches ever delivered by a minor president, George W. Bush last week blamed some democrats and anti-war critics for changing their minds about the war in Iraq and now saying they were deceived. It is deeply irresponsible to rewrite history of how that war began, the president said. Yes, sir, but it is even more deeply irresponsible to rewrite history of how history was rewritten in the first place.

We can endlessly debate the facts. More important, though, is the mind-set of those in the administration from the president on down, who had these facts- or, as we shall see, none at all- and mangled them in the cause of the war.

For example, the insistence that Saddam was somehow linked to 9/11 tells you that to bush and his people, the facts did not matter. It did not matter that Mohamed Atta never met with Iraqis in Prague. It did not matter that Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the international Atomic Energy Agency, was finding no evidence of an Iraqi nuclear weapons programs. None of that mattered to Vice-President Cheney, a fibber without peer in the realm, who warn of a reconstituted nuclear weapons program, promoted the non existent Prague meeting and went after legitimate critics. "We will not hesitate to discredit you." Cheney told ElBaradei and Hans Blix.

At the moment, no one can have confidence in the Bush Administration. Almost three years into the war, the world is not safer, the middle east is less stable and the Americans and others die for a mission that is not what it once was called: A fight for democracy. It would be nice, as well as important, to know how we got into this mess. It wasnt that he had the wrong facts. It was that the right ones didnt matter.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/...p-311821c.html

eg420ne Reviewed by eg420ne on 11-17-2005. Bush cant handle the truth In one of the most intellectually incoherent major speeches ever delivered by a minor president, George W. Bush last week blamed some democrats and anti-war critics for changing their minds about the war in Iraq and now saying they were deceived. It is deeply irresponsible to rewrite history of how that war began, the president said. Yes, sir, but it is even more deeply irresponsible to rewrite history of how history was rewritten in the first place. We can endlessly debate the facts. More Rating: 5

[Psycho4Bud]

In one of the most intellectually incoherent major speeches ever delivered by a minor president, George W. Bush last week blamed some democrats and anti-war critics for changing their minds about the war in Iraq and now saying they were deceived. It is deeply irresponsible to rewrite history of how that war began, the president said. Yes, sir, but it is even more deeply irresponsible to rewrite history of how history was rewritten in the first place.

We can endlessly debate the facts. More important, though, is the mind-set of those in the administration from the president on down, who had these facts- or, as we shall see, none at all- and mangled them in the cause of the war.

For example, the insistence that Saddam was somehow linked to 9/11 tells you that to bush and his people, the facts did not matter. It did not matter that Mohamed Atta never met with Iraqis in Prague. It did not matter that Mohamed ElBaradei, head of the international Atomic Energy Agency, was finding no evidence of an Iraqi nuclear weapons programs. None of that mattered to Vice-President Cheney, a fibber without peer in the realm, who warn of a reconstituted nuclear weapons program, promoted the non existent Prague meeting and went after legitimate critics. "We will not hesitate to discredit you." Cheney told ElBaradei and Hans Blix.

At the moment, no one can have confidence in the Bush Administration. Almost three years into the war, the world is not safer, the middle east is less stable and the Americans and others die for a mission that is not what it once was called: A fight for democracy. It would be nice, as well as important, to know how we got into this mess. It wasnt that he had the wrong facts. It was that the right ones didnt matter.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/col/...p-311821c.html

You talk like this is an entire failure. Since the invasion the Iraqi people have had open election for their parliment, open elections on a constitution, and will have open elections again for their permanant parliment and also for president and prime minister. How is that a failure? In 2006 our people will be coming home with a job well done!! :thumbsup:

[eg420ne]

2082 dead soldiers is failure

[Psycho4Bud]

2082 dead soldiers is failure

Thats not a failure...thats an unfortunate circumstance of war! So in your eyes, WW2 must have been a complete fuck-up!!!

[eg420ne]

It is a failure if your prez lied to you about what you are fighting for.

[Psycho4Bud]

It is a failure if your prez lied to you about what you are fighting for.

I don't see where the lie comes in....like I stated...to bad Syria wouldn't step up! :cursing:

[Tholiak]

UH have you looked at all th Democrat speeches before the Iraq war? They were ALL for taking Sadam out, they only changed their minds after.\


2082 dead soldiers is failure

^^ Liberals needs a new argument. How many died in WW1? WW2? Korea? Vietnam? Most of the dead in Iraq are from Roadside Bombs laid by cowards who wont fight a battle they cant win.

And yes the world is safer, every dead muslim makes the world a safer place. One less person to blow himself up and murder Civilians

[Psycho4Bud]

This is what Sadamm was saying before the war....that America didn't have the stomach for it...why didn't he just say the Democrats didn't have the stomach for it? :question:

[Tholiak]

Here Here..and now look what the democrats are calling for, Troops to withdraw from Iraq because there are more imminent threats in the world.

[Psycho4Bud]

They call for a troop withdrawl AFTER the president of Iraq and G.W. stated that our people would be coming home gradually in 2006. As if they had any influence on it!