that is what they say, and it is what i have been saying for years. the only long term solution for peace is the spread of democracy/capitalism. and this means starting new governments in the middle east. there is no more noble a purpose. and i mean that literally. no idea is more noble than what we are doing. and our motivations are exactly right. we are a better nation than any that ever existed and the things that we do for ourselves and the world are amazing. we have no desire to be a an empire, to enrich ourlseves off of foreign lands. we simply want to be secure and free, and we are more free when others are free, because backward and oppressed nations are violent and harbor backward people and ideologies. the lie is that our motivation is to benefit ourselves at the expense of other nations. we succeed and make ourlseves safer when afghanistan is free and safe, same with iraq. we dont want these places any more than we want germany or japan.
Had. Past tense. That is the friggin' issue here, everybody knew that he once HAD them, that's the reason UNSCOM spent 10 years on the ground in Iraq finding it all and destroying it. They testified to this and were ignored. Our own inspectors told us that we would not find any and we did not. The problem is that it was known that the WMD's NO LONGER EXISTED. And this was ignored. The fact that Saddam resisted the inspections and demolitions does not affect the obvious fact that the inspectors actually found and demolished them. I have not questioned his motivation. I question his competence, his intelligence, and his honsesty. :lol: It hasn't so far. Have you read any of the war history's already published? Hacks like yourself base a ton of opinion upon an ounce of knowledge.
He lied because he had allowed himself to believe only the data that agreed with his notions, even after it was disavowed, such as the yellow-cake uranium mistake. From the moment of taking Office, Saddam Hussein was enemy #1 for the Bush administration, even though Al Qaeda had just blown up the USS Cole. Bush's father had been criticized for allowing Saddam to escape and Bush wanted to amend that. The Head of our Al Qaeda CIA team and Bush's own terrorism chief testified that they were not taken seriously until after 9/11 and then were asked to "find the link to Saddam Hussein". Bush would have never gotten permission to invade Iraq if not for 9/11. He parlayed those fears into making a bogeyman of Saddam and created an excuse to attack him. I've never accused Bush of being insincere or self-serving, just gullible, narrow of vision, and intransigent. And not entirely honest.
No, he failed to verify it and it was a false belief. The truth is the truth and he did not speak the truth.
Neither are they truths. Imagine . . . martin suggesting that false beliefs are The Truth. :lol: :rofl:
simple point here. you just are not listening. if bush is an idiot and believes nonsense, he is an idiot not a liar. and the difference is huge. if i tell you something that i belive to be true, and i am wrong, i wasnt lying, i was simply wrong. bush doesnt lie. clinton does. obama does.
It's a simpletons's point. No, you are both wrong and lying. You must be accountable for being truthful if you are to be considered honest by anyone. Anyone who claims that he was just mistaken when he gets caught lying only deepens the distrust. He said there were WMD's in Iraq--lie. He said that CIA covert agent leakers would be punished--lie. he said that Saddam harbored an aided Al Qadea--lie. He sad that he was a uniter, not a divider--lie. He said that he didn't know Ken Lay until 1994, after he was governor, although his oil company had actually been a partner with Lay--lie. Everybody lies about poosy. So do you. Example?
