Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent


Reply
 
Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-22-2004, 01:11 PM   #1
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Default For old time's sake: Bush's Lies About Iraq!

Bush's Lies About Iraq

by Christopher Scheer, Robert Scheer & Lakshmi Chaudhry

As we mark the first anniversary of the beginning of Bush's war with Iraq, the five pillars of argument upon which the President based his Iraq adventure are crumbling into dust in a rather dramatic fashion. Yet the Bush Administration continues to brazenly invent new rationales for its foreign policy, shamelessly twisting the facts to support it. Let's review the five big lies Bush used as justification for his actions.

Lie #1--They Attacked Us: Iraq Supported Al Qaeda. Astonishingly, President Bush, in a rare moment of candor, finally admitted half a year after the invasion that there was no evidence Saddam Hussein's Iraq had any links to the 9/11 attacks, undermining eighteen months of implying the exact opposite. Yet in both of his recent big speeches--a brief and rather reserved statement after Saddam's capture and his macho 2004 State of the Union address--Bush again dished out the fundamental lie that the war and occupation of Iraq can reasonably be linked to the "war on terror," even as a new book by ex-Bush Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill described the Bush foreign policy team's consistent obsession with Iraq from the first days of the Administration.

Lies #2 and #3--Imminent Threats: Iraq's Bio-Chem and Nuclear Weapons Programs. A year after using his 2003 State of the Union address to paint Iraq's allegedly vast arsenal of WMD as a grave threat to the United States and the world, Bush wisely avoided mentioning anything about uranium there--though he did spend a great deal of his latest SOTU defending the war on the grounds that "had we failed to act, the dictator's weapons of mass destruction programs would continue to this day." Dick Cheney, in interviews with USA Today and the Los Angeles Times, echoed this fudging--last year "weapons," this year "programs"--declaring that "the jury's still out" on whether Iraq had WMD and that "I am a long way at this stage from concluding that somehow there was some fundamental flaw in our intelligence."

Only days later, chief US weapons inspector David Kay quit and began telling the world what the Bush Administration had been denying since taking office: that Saddam Hussein's regime was but a weak shadow of the semi-fearsome military force it had been at the time of the first Gulf War thirteen years ago; that it had no significant chemical, biological or nuclear weapons programs or stockpiles still in place; and that the UN inspections and allied bombing runs in the 1990s had been much more effective than their critics had believed at eroding these programs.

Lie #4--It Will Be Easy: Iraq as a "Cakewalk." "The capture of Saddam Hussein does not mean the end of violence in Iraq," Bush admitted, putting the lie to the idiotic and arrogant statements by Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others that policing Iraq would be a simple matter that could be quickly delegated to Iraqis as soon as they stopped celebrating the US military's arrival and cleaned up all those flowers they were going to throw.

Reality has continued to diverge from the White House's neat depictions of inexorable progress. In the weeks after Saddam's capture, the number of US soldiers killed actually increased, several helicopters were downed by enemy fire, and on Christmas Day alone there were eighteen attacks, including nine nearly simultaneous rocket grenade launches on embassies, apartments and the "green zone," which houses the Coalition Provisional Authority headquarters. American KIAs have passed 500, while uncounted Iraqis continue to die in undocumented skirmishes.

Lie #5--The Moral Justification: Iraq as a Democratic Model. As the other lies upon which this war were based have been crumbling, this one has moved to the forefront. For war apologists such as the New York Times's Thomas Friedman, if we can "bring democracy to Iraq," all those immoral means will justify this noble end. Here, too, we find grave problems continuing to frustrate the fantasies of neocons and neoliberals alike: The Kurds want to retain the large de facto autonomy they've achieved in the north; the Sunni areas continue to be extremely hostile to the occupation; and the long-oppressed majority Shiites are protesting in the streets in the tens of thousands, demanding one-man, one-vote elections. The CIA now considers civil war in Iraq a serious possibility.

Just as it didn't solve the stunning array of problems facing Iraq, the capture of Saddam did nothing to heal the rifts in our own country, where the lies of this Administration have so polarized the populace that this election year promises to be extremely nasty. We Americans now have but three options: We can deny that the Administration lied and continues to lie about Saddam's ties to terror and the threat he allegedly posed to the United States; we can be aware of the lies, but cling to a faith that good things will come from them, that the ends justify the means; or we can get angry about the lies and how truth has become a casualty of 9/11.

The lies of this Administration concerning Iraq rise to the level of the greatest scandals in American history. Now it is time to clean up the mess and reinvigorate our democracy.

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20040329&s=scheer
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." —Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2004, 01:24 PM   #2
chukzombi
The Undead Shaman
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: The Bowels of Hell, A.K.A. New Jersey
Posts: 9,564
Since when is the president supposed to be a prophet and foretell the future?
__________________
Chukzombi Astrocreep
Magister (re-united)
chukzombi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2004, 02:39 PM   #3
Lurikeen
Freaky
 
Lurikeen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Seattle, WA
Posts: 17,873
Yeah, Bush is just an innocent bystander vicitimized by evil Liberals.
__________________
"All I said was... that bit of halibut is good enough for Jehovah." —Monty Python's "Life of Brian"
Lurikeen is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2004, 06:50 PM   #4
Caelie123
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Georgia
Posts: 2,027
Damn Lurikeen there is hope for you yet. You are starting to see that Bush was a victim just like you and I.
__________________
Caelie
65 Human Cleric
Caelie123 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2004, 11:17 PM   #5
ShardmoonVer.1
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Jacksonville
Posts: 7,457
Excellent Editorial.
__________________
If you don't have something good to say about some one, say it loud.
ShardmoonVer.1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2004, 11:37 PM   #6
Brigiid
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 7,879
Send a message via AIM to Brigiid
Your link no workie.

I get the icky "page cannot be displayed" screen when I click.
__________________
Meh.
Brigiid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-22-2004, 11:52 PM   #7
korast
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 2,846
Lie #1--They Attacked Us: Iraq Supported Al Qaeda. Astonishingly, President Bush, in a rare moment of candor, finally admitted half a year after the invasion that there was no evidence Saddam Hussein's Iraq had any links to the 9/11 attacks
I dont believe he ever claimed that Sadam would be linked to 9/11, but instead said that iraq is a country which supported terrorism, and was likely giving weapons information to terrorist. I cant comment on the accuracies of that.

Lies #2 and #3--Imminent Threats: Iraq's Bio-Chem and Nuclear Weapons Programs.
Theres 0 doubt that Iraq HAD weapons programs. That is a fact. The question is whether they would acceptably submit to prove that they had disarmed to the world. The answer was basically no. For all we know saddam destroyed what little was left in the last months before war or even during it, and or smuggled stuff cross border to other countries. I know there has been no WMDs found, but that was never the issue, the issue was he was never willing to prove it to the world. I personally wouldnt see this issue as reason to invade alone.

Lie #4--It Will Be Easy: Iraq as a "Cakewalk."

Wow this one is just stupid. Iraq has be FAR less challenging a military procedure than bush gave hints of when it was theory.

Lie #5--The Moral Justification: Iraq as a Democratic Model.

Honestly i dont give a damn what form of goverment they set up. But i think you'd find the greater majority of iraqi's are thankful that sadam is gone and will persevere through terrorist attacks which are relatively minor compared to the 10s of thousands saddam and his sons had killed. Everything from entire familys being executed at night to random people in jail being buried alive because they needed more room to torture people in jails. Was removing sadam a bad thing? No.

Now if you think America should of intervened or not or if it was worth 600 lives to give 50million or however many iraqi's a chance at freedom, or there is no justifyable increase in security for us beyond that scope, is up for debate. but these "lies" hardly have any justification
korast is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2004, 01:07 PM   #8
Vulpes
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Big Wonderful Wyoming
Posts: 140
I always thought a lie was a deliberate falsehood. I guess I never knew that not predicting the future correctly was a lie. A lie would be more like saying

"I never had sexual relations with that woman" when, in fact, I had just had my cock in her mouth. That would be a lie. Not accurately predicting the World Series champs this year, based on all known information, would not really be a lie.

Vulpes
Vulpes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2004, 02:22 PM   #9
Inmountains
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 2,501
Ah, good ole “Bush Bashing 101, 9,000 ways to Bash Dubya.” Let’s look at just a few of them. BBP=Bush Bashing Points, they are in your syllabus.

BBP 1: Bush lied about Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. In order to lie, one must know something is true and argue it is false, or vice versa, for purposes of deceit. Congressional Democrats had access to the same intelligence reports Bush did. Thus for Bush to have known there were no WMDs, they too would have known there were none. Why then did almost all of them vote for Public Law 107-243, which empowered Bush to “to use the armed forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate” in dealing with Iraq, if they knew there were no WMD’s?

BBP 2: Bush lied about an imminent Iraqi threat to trick congress. Bush did not say Saddam was an imminent threat; he said we couldn’t wait until the threat became imminent. The Democrats heard the speeches and have the transcripts. During Senate hearings on 107-243, Secretary of State Colin Powell, responding to a direct query from Sen. John Kerry, said Bush was prepared to take action in Iraq with or without the UN Security Council’s blessings if Saddam continued violating UN Resolutions. Kerry said, “I understand.” A few minutes later, Powell said the major problem was Saddam needed to be disarmed. Kerry concurred, “I agree. I agree completely.” Tricked?

BBP 3: Bush did (or didn’t) have a plan for Iraq. This bash point may be the weakest of all. The most radical Bush-bashers, led by Sen. Ted Kennedy, claim Bush’s plan to invade Iraq “was hatched in Texas” (before the 2000 election).” Other bashers protest he had no plan whatsoever, while some say he had a plan for war but nor for peace. Mimicking their presumptive presidential candidate, the Democrats have taken all sides on this one.

BBP 4: Bush failed to honor his military service obligations. Democratic National Committee Chairman Terry McAuliffe and unofficial Democratic propagandist Michael Moore accused Bush of being AWOL and deserting the Air National Guard, respectively. On a Sunday TV talk show, Kerry reinforced these reckless allegations by saying the charges needed to be looked into. Bush immediately authorized release of all his military records, something Kerry refuses to do. Witnessess have verified Bush’s service. Not one of the AWOL/deserter bashers has apologized to Bush for their slander.

BBP 5: The night of this Super Tuesday near-sweep, Kerry warned his supporters that Bush would go negative soon. The next day, Bush aired soft campaign ads, which included scenes from 9/11, an actual historic event. How dare Bush offend the firefighters union, which has endorsed Kerry and is by his side at every rally? How dare he offend survivor’ families, many of whom belong to organizations indirectly funded by Kerry’s wife’s nonprofit foundation? Can any mortal be so insensitive? Anyone remember the Democrats for using The Day of Infamy for political purposes, which he unabashedly did? President Lincoln used the Civil War in his 1864 re-election campaign, but what do you expect – he was a mean-spirited Republican.

BBP 6: NO, WAIT, let’s skip to BBP 9,001: This just in – Bush isn’t the only liar, his friends are the ‘most crooked’…lying bunch.” Kerry blurted this to union workers after a March 9 speech to that paragon of VIRTUE, organized labor. Kerry’s Super Tuesday warning about going negative appears to have been a diversionary tactic.

The Democrats Bush Bashing features self-indictments, self-contradictions and duplicity. I can only hope that all voters will act intelligently, see past all the bluster, posturing and duplicity in Kerry when they go to the polls this coming November.
Inmountains is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2004, 03:24 PM   #10
bumbleroot
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 7,756
In order to lie, one must know something is true and argue it is false, or vice versa,
Or one must know something is not proven and state it as a fact. That is also a lie and the order of lie Bush told. It is commonly used amongst exaggerators.

but instead said that......
I cant comment on the accuracies of that. Korast, if you aren't even sure of your facts, how can you even use them to form an argument?

Theres 0 doubt that Iraq HAD weapons programs. That is a fact. The question is whether they would acceptably submit to prove that they had disarmed to the world. Wrong!!! The first question is whether he still had these weapons, because if he did not its hard to prove that nothing is something. All evidence that everyone knew and he claimed shows he had gotten rid of his programs, he knew it, the world knew it and we knew this.


But i think you'd find the greater majority of iraqi's are thankful that sadam is gone and will persevere through terrorist attacks which are relatively minor compared to the 10s of thousands saddam and his sons had killed
this shows your lack of forethought. You obviously can not see the potential for Civil War in Iraq. I can guarantee you that this raises a greater spectre of deaths than anything Hussein did. What you also don't realize is that the only way possibile to run Iraq to avoid this Civil War is with an iron fist (exactly as Hussein did). That doesn't make what he did good, because it wasn't, just a little slice of reality for you is all.
bumbleroot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2004, 04:35 PM   #11
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Bumble,
What you also don't realize is that the only way possibile to run Iraq to avoid this Civil War is with an iron fist (exactly as Hussein did). That doesn't make what he did good, because it wasn't, just a little slice of reality for you is all.
Now I think we have a better understanding of the Liberal mindset.
Thanks for that fine insight Bumble.

And Iraq will have a civil war because you can see into the future?
You should have predicted 9/11 and saved us all this war.
Dream on..



Side,
Ever notice that the Libs and the national media can only vent the (Unproven)
Bush is a liar senario, while allowing Kerry to lie every day of the week
without even a mention?

If any of you think the hard working citizens of America will not see
through this serade, you are very mistaken. And it will be fun watching
the liberal scum squirm around like headless chickens afterwards.

Oh, and not to mention the countless recounts because the liberals
are in constant denile that their elitism could ever fail. Suckers.



GOD BLESS AMERICA
Zolmaz Zo'Boto (Lie after Lie after Lie, thank you senator Kennedy)
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-23-2004, 11:16 PM   #12
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
Bumble,
What you also don't realize is that the only way possibile to run Iraq to avoid this Civil War is with an iron fist (exactly as Hussein did).


Bumble,
So how many women should be raped, tortured, and killed each day?

How many men should be killed to keep up with the numbers that Saddam & Sons had put to death?

How do we choose which children are placed in prison?

How do we decide who's tongues get cut out in public?

How many ounces of rations to each person should be given for the minimal survival of each person?

Should we use their oil to create more palaces and torture chambers?

Who decides who gets what? Should we just let Saddam out of his cell? HUH?

How does America get out to let the old Iraq back in?



Bumble,
You've debated Iraq for months and months. Certainly your conclusion's have
reached a culmination for you to create such a post, not as if this wasn't important to you.

So please, Explain to us all, the answers to fulfill your dream of a perfect Iraq.
Be Proud Bumble. Stand tall. Your dictating the future of Iraq with an IRON HAND!

Please answer my simple honest questions. I insist.



GOD BLESS AMERICA
Zolmaz

Last edited by Zolmaz Zo'Boto; 03-23-2004 at 11:22 PM.
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:51 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.