Bob Woodward discovers the truth about Bush and Iraq...
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.
Let's take this hypothetical. Let's say Bush didn't invade, and Iraq had WMDs. Let's say Iraq gave them to a group that used them in Israel killing thousands, and Israel responded by bombing Iraq. Now, if that lead to a war between Israel, Iraq, Syria, Jordan and Egypt (the whole Jews vs Islam thing) and we got to witness mushroom clouds in the ME, I wonder what you would then say about Bush.
I'm guessing it would be something like, "Bush's failure to do anything was the reason this happened."
It has been stated before, you need to be sure when you go to war and invade a country for 10 years that never did a thing to us. You don't invade a country on speculation, you invade based on rock solid evidence.
I have to wonder about your hypothetical, would we actually be in worse shape today if we did nothing and it turned out they had WMD. Seems like our actions are resulting in many unintended consequences. North Korea actually has WMD's and has threatened us yet we have not invaded.
Clinton had the same information that Bush had but chose not to invade, HW Bush chose to invade Iraq for a very good reason but then had the good sense to have an exit strategy.
People here comparing Clinton signing a paper recommending a regime change is a far cry from invading a country.
Too late fellas. No one is buying this at this point.
Iraq was a failure, and it was started on false pretenses.
Bob Woodward can't buy enough lipstick to put on that pig. Nice try though I must admit.
yeah, I agree, and remember people saying, "What the heck is going on, whey are we now going into Iraq?" Yanno, it's no wonder foreign countries hate us....
to think we wasted all that money for us to go in there and try to change that culture, you can't do it, it's way to primitive...distorted and what fools we are to believe....
It has been stated before, you need to be sure when you go to war and invade a country for 10 years that never did a thing to us. You don't invade a country on speculation, you invade based on rock solid evidence.
I have to wonder about your hypothetical, would we actually be in worse shape today if we did nothing and it turned out they had WMD. Seems like our actions are resulting in many unintended consequences. North Korea actually has WMD's and has threatened us yet we have not invaded.
Clinton had the same information that Bush had but chose not to invade, HW Bush chose to invade Iraq for a very good reason but then had the good sense to have an exit strategy.
People here comparing Clinton signing a paper recommending a regime change is a far cry from invading a country.
When Clinton and leading Democrats spoke about Iraq and WMDs, they didn't say "there is a chance Iraq may have WMDs", they told us over and over the Iraq HAD WMDs. Why did they use such rhetoric that gave support for Bush going to war? Why did they lie to us enabling such a mistake?
yeah, I agree, and remember people saying, "What the heck is going on, whey are we now going into Iraq?" Yanno, it's no wonder foreign countries hate us....
Many hated us prior to that. Don't forget that 911 was planned and set in motion before Bush took office or we went to war.
When Clinton and leading Democrats spoke about Iraq and WMDs, they didn't say "there is a chance Iraq may have WMDs", they told us over and over the Iraq HAD WMDs. Why did they use such rhetoric that gave support for Bush going to war? Why did they lie to us enabling such a mistake?
Like I indicated, suspecting that a country has WMDs is one thing but going to war with a country over conjecture is quite another. The UN inspectors did not find any proof before we invaded, they were ignored by Bush, Rumsfeld and Rice. Clinton did not invade because there was a reasonable doubt, Bush chose to ignore the facts.
If Bush didnt lie than he is the most incompetent and.gullible president because I along with many others knew there were no WMDs.
So either a lair or a.bumbling idiot, take.your pick makes no difference to me
Bill Clinton thought there where WMD's too as did his wife Hillary who voted for war but not to fund it as did Jay Rockefeller and other incompetent Democrats...you and that other clueless windbag posting before you don't know squat!
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.
