Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Cheney rarely (if ever) missed a chance to state in public that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 while Bush told us Saddam had connections with al Qaeda while Cheney himself told us in 2002 "His (Hussein) regime has had high-level contacts with al Qaeda going back a decade "
Just HOW could Cheney say so unequivocally Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 while tying Iraq's leader to the perpetrators of the 9/11 attacks?
I'm convinced you're attempting to excuse the inexcusable and only demand evidence from others while producing none to support your own allegations.
In 2002, were you vocal in your belief that you were being lied to? Or are you relying on hindsight 20/20 to tell us that Bush et al lied to you?
Just like the title says: If liberals disingenuously insist on claiming that the faulty intelligence used by George W. Bush in the run-up to the Iraq War was actually a bald-faced lie told by the President, then logic would dictate that the "faulty intelligence" that Barack Obama used as a cover-up for the Benghazi massacre (ie. the YouTube video) was a bald-faced lie told by the President as well.
Both have been touted as "faulty intelligence" by the respective administrations, but liberals insist that it was a "lie" that Bush told but it was merely "the best intelligence we had at the time" in deflecting criticisms for Barack Obama's failure in Benghazi.
Pure, unadulterated hypocrisy on display once again.
Bush did not have faulty information. They took correct information and turned it into lies.
Many of us participated in numerous anti-war demonstrations prior to the invasion because we knew we were being lied to. And we were right.
Revisionist history. Folks rallied against the war because they were against war. Not because of lies. Point me to something, anything that corroborates your story.
Revisionist history. Folks rallied against the war because they were against war. Not because of lies. Point me to something, anything that corroborates your story.
You can hope all you want and it won't change the facts that Bush and Cheney lied to us? History will always point that out.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,333 posts, read 54,428,613 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC
In 2002, were you vocal in your belief that you were being lied to? Or are you relying on hindsight 20/20 to tell us that Bush et al lied to you?
Tell the truth.
The truth is that in 2002 I believed we were attacked by al Qaeda, a group KNOWN to operate in more than 40 countries and that invading/occupying one country that represented NO imminent threat to the US was a stupid thing to do being it would do little/nothing to eliminate our attackers.
BTW, I see you have NO answer for just why we should have believed Cheney when he told us Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 while also telling us Iraq had at least decade long ties to al Qaeda leadership.
You whine about liberals being incapable of analysis while we see none from you, only lame excuses.
Revisionist history. Folks rallied against the war because they were against war. Not because of lies. Point me to something, anything that corroborates your story.
You are the one revising history. I know why I was demonstrating. You just can't accept the fact that no matter how you slice it, your boy Georgie is still responsible for lying us into this bogus war. There's no getting away from that, no matter how fast you attempt to deflect.
Yet there's still said to be more than 5,000 civilian contractors in Iraq. Who's paying/protecting them? IMO every American should have been given a deadline to leave and been told after that they were on their own.
The $700M is for the Embassy alone. Great investment in America, eh?
Cheney wanted the embassy to have his statue in front of it but Bush whined and they didn't but they did give Cheney another big under the table check. I can't prove that but you can't prove it's not true either.
You can hope all you want and it won't change the facts that Bush and Cheney lied to us? History will always point that out.
What is up for debate is whether it was a lie, or whether the invasion was based on faulty intelligence. I want someone, anyone to prove to me it was a lie. If they can't, the those folks are being intellectually dishonest and downright disingenuous based on hindsight 20/20 and, even then, no proof that a lie was told.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
