How can people not see that Bush lied to get us into Iraq?

Brinlarr

an eye witness in the meeting said it was decided to attack iraq beacuse it had "better aerial targets" , when powell pointed out that iraq didnt have anything to do with it, then afghanistan was given priority and iraq was to be attacked second.
iraq had a brutal dictaor but it had the rule of law , electricty, water and power, under the american occupation it has none or little of these things , sure saddam killed his own people but not as many as the usa. lets make this clear saddam was a secual republic , bin laden al khida were not welcomed in iraq, not because saddam was a good man but beacuse he didnt want to lose power, bush has given hope and thousands of recruits to the jihadist islamists of bin laden, bush is the best friend they have.
iran has attacked and breifly occupied greece and they are now pushing to the medditeraina again, why becuse bush stoped their enemy saddam

if like bush you dont know your history you are deemed to repeat it. apprently the usa didnt learn anything out of vietnam

Here ask these people!

"There is no doubt that... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (d, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is using and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force â€” if necessary â€” to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Â¨ÅšÅµÃ¢ÄÄÅÂ¨

And where is Osama?

fearslady

Blah blah blah; the fact is we ARE in Iraq. Why not come up with something to help get us OUT of there instead of whining about how we got there in the first place?

(The WMD are in Syria and Iran; there is no link to 9/11 except that Saddam let terrorists train in his country; and if you want an argument, go take a look at some of those mass graves and have a little chat with George Sr.)

ShellBellzGee

Well for one, Osama was the main target since 9/11, so now, where is he??? He just wanted to finish what his good ol' daddy couldn't finish in the 90's.
I think people do see that Bush lied about it all, those are the same people that voted him into a second term in office, they just won't admit they voted for the wrong person and try so damn hard to stick to by "their" president.

Cybeq

Wow. A president lied!? I'm flabbergasted. The real question should be why is it permissible to invade a country simply because we think they have WMD's? I didn't buy the logic the first time around. They were absolutely no threat to us whatsoever.

Devil

I used to believe there was some strategy like a foothold in the Middle East to hold off future aggression and if that's the case, why lie (which he knowingly did)?

Now I don't even think Jr. knows why we are there? I bet he wishes he could close his eyes, tap his heels together and it would all go away but daddy can't get him out of this jam. Time for him to finally grow up and be a man and take responsibility for his screwups.

Pauline

He just wanted to control their oil

billc4u

as you can tell by now and in past elections the republican party has done a super job of misdirecting the intelligent on stories that are far off base from the original subject such as iraq when you mention that most of the time you get sidetracked by the foley scandal, by gay marriage ect. and you soon see that the religious card is always played during the election ect. People just do not want to believe that it is being done so now you see how people can not see.

mckenziecalhoun

When the U.N. said there were WMDs;
When Kerry said people shouldn't vote for him if they don't think there are WMDs in Iraq;
When the inspectors said that Saddam was playing games with them, lying to them, making their job impossible, when he promised during the First Gulf War to cooperate fully in order to get the cease-fire (we were still at war when we invaded this last time, we never declared peace, just cease-fire);
When Saddam sends an assassin to kill the elder President Bush AFTER the Gulf War;
When Saddam killed large numbers of his people with poison gas, and bragged about developing WMDs of various sorts even up to the invasion;

When recent documents show that Saddam was bragging that he DID have WMDs to his allies, I'd say that calling President Bush a liar is a lie.

Mistaken, yes. Lying, no.

Your actions are seditious. Not illegal, but seditious. Next time you want to spread unfounded rumors about a President (ANY of them), use facts, not absence of facts.

For instance. You said he lied. I say you're lying. Where's your proof? Where's the facts that prove he lied?

Your actions are like saying that "There are no unicorns here, therefore, unicorns don't exist."

Only the Democrats (my own party, which dealt with the same nonsense when President Clinton was attacked just as seditiously) tried desperately to say that 9/11 and Saddam were linked. President Bush repeatedly made clear they weren't.

Large caravans were photographed by satellite leaving Iraq before the invasion and were reported in the news.

Saddam had a DECADE to hide them. Because President Bush finally got tired waiting for the U.N. to follow up on their threats (which some wanted to wait even MORE time for, perhaps twenty years?) and couldn't find them, the only motive must be he lied?

Is that the most intelligent alternative you can find? Why is it the first one you pose (the only one)?

If we had a court system like that, the majority of us would be in jail. Why is President Bush guilty until proven innocent?

This rumor is seditious and poorly thought out. You'll note the politicians of our party NO-LONGER use it. For good reason.

Take a clue. Stop it. It doesn't help us. Focus on dissent and protest, not sedition, not rumors, not name-calling.

Some of us are still Patriots. We're tired of being a party of Anti-Americans, or dealing with the same behavior in the Republican party (they have more than their share as well).

Kick them all out of both parties.

America first, support our President respectfully, but argue, dissent, protest as necessary to make your voices heard.

We're sick of the constant cry of "look how bad we are" from either side!

jftdv2000

Yes, he did lie. But he was also using the flawed intel that was gathered during the Clinton Administration. However, the Defense Intelligence Agency always said that there was no WMB's or WMD development in Iraq. When 9-11 happened, DIA looked at all the info they could find, and they could not conclude that there was or was not a link to 9-11. However, all Intel sources we had was able to link Iraq to the terrorist activities in Israel.

donaldtapscott@sbcglobal.net

I have come to believe that there are a lot of people either walking around with their head up their butts are just giving an answer and no nothing about the subject. I would like to believe the latter but people will to this day tell you Columbus discovered America and they still teach that in school, so go figure, what's really going on.

Kylie P

I can see it. I live in Australia and I believe that Bush is really manipulating our PM John Howard. I am afraid that our country will be dragged further into this mess. We had nothing to do with this and now the people of Australia are fearing for their lives because of this man. What does Suddam have to do with 911? This war is a joke. What to do????

mrs michelle

Well good thing we are not stupid and uneducated or else we would be in Iraq as well..according to Kerry anyway

Oh My!

You need to go back to your room and finish your homework or your mommy is going to ground you!

lady01love

I don't think anyone thinks the war in Iraq is a war we should have started. Yes Saddam was evil, but that was a problem that should have waited until we fixed the mess in Afghanistan. But since we are there we have to support our troops. We have to make sure our troops are given the tools and resources they need to win that war. Although we might not like Bush or many of the things he has done since being in office, he is still the President and needs our support.

We need to stop the Bush bashing and give support our troops. We must show a united front for our troops only. No one ever said you have to like the president. We need to give solutions to fixing the problem so we can get out of Iraq and stop complaining about being lied to. What president hasn't lied. If we aren't careful we will have another Vietnam.

OkieBoy

How can people like you not see why we are in Iraq? Ohhh, I forgot, your another mindless left wing loonie, excuse me.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: