The Bush Admin. Never Lied To Justify the Invasion of Iraq.

[Dayton3]

The Bush Administration Never Lied In Order to Justify the Invasion of Iraq

The entire mantra of “Bush lied, people died” has been the refrain of critics of the Iraq War and the Bush Admin. For years. It has been repeatedly used in an attempt to destroy the Bush Admin. And delegitimize the U.S. led invasion for years.
Allowing this to go unchallenged was one of the greatest mistakes of the Bush Admin.
And on two separate levels the claim simply does not hold up.

1) Before the U.S. led invasion, President Bush questioned CIA Director George Tenet about the evidence supporting the existence of WMDs in Iraq. According to the Bob Woodward book, Tenet exclaimed that it was a “slam dunk” in favor of evidence showing WMDs.
What was President Bush supposed to do? Tenet was a Clinton appointee with no reason to lie or suck up to Bush.
The only answer I’ve ever been given is that Bush should’ve looked at the intelligence sources himself. This is completely ridiculous. A president does not go around interviewing Iraqi dissidents.
President Bush would’ve been foolish not to take the positive declarations of the CIA Director at face value.

2) Lying about WMDs in Iraq makes no logical sense. We’re supposed to believe that the Bush admin. Lied to justify an invasion…that would inevitably reveal that lie to the world.
The ONLY explanation I’ve heard regarding this from the “Bush lied” people is that “they figured the war would be so popular that no one would care”. Which is ridiculous beyond belief.

Were there WMDs in Iraq at the time of the invasion? Almost certainly not. But the CIA Director said there were and any president would be foolish not to act on that claim.

If your oncologist insists that you have cancer do you ask to see the lab reports yourself and interview the lab techs? Of course not! Probably you schedule surgery or chemo whichever that same doctor recommends.
Were mistakes made during the occupation of Iraq that cost thousands of American lives? Most certainly. But that is another issue that has nothing to do about the legitimacy of the invasion.

Did the Bush admin. Emphasize the stronger parts of their argument in favor of invading? Of course they did! This is what you do when making a case to a jury or to the American people. You have no obligation to argue both sides. There were plenty of opponents of the invasion to argue the other side.

Either way, there is ZERO evidence that the Bush Admin. ever deliberately and knowingly promoted false information to justify the invasion of Iraq.

 

[ClosedCaption]

 

[KNB]

Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB80/

 

[occupied]

Is Bush already getting the Reagan legacy massage treatment? Might take a few more decades to make that world-wide disaster seem like a liberal plot.

 

[Lakhota]

The Downing Street Memo :: What is it?

 

[Nyvin]

Bush probably didn't lie, he ignorantly didn't look into the situation good enough and only listened to a select few inner circle advisers who were all way too gung-ho about invading. Most likely he believed everything he said...even believing about there being ties between Alqaeda and Saddam.

The fact that Bush is a dumbass doesn't make the situation any better for him though, and certainly not any better for the neoconservatives.

 

[Clementine]

The Bush Administration Never Lied In Order to Justify the Invasion of Iraq

The entire mantra of “Bush lied, people died” has been the refrain of critics of the Iraq War and the Bush Admin. For years. It has been repeatedly used in an attempt to destroy the Bush Admin. And delegitimize the U.S. led invasion for years.
Allowing this to go unchallenged was one of the greatest mistakes of the Bush Admin.
And on two separate levels the claim simply does not hold up.

1) Before the U.S. led invasion, President Bush questioned CIA Director George Tenet about the evidence supporting the existence of WMDs in Iraq. According to the Bob Woodward book, Tenet exclaimed that it was a “slam dunk” in favor of evidence showing WMDs.
What was President Bush supposed to do? Tenet was a Clinton appointee with no reason to lie or suck up to Bush.
The only answer I’ve ever been given is that Bush should’ve looked at the intelligence sources himself. This is completely ridiculous. A president does not go around interviewing Iraqi dissidents.
President Bush would’ve been foolish not to take the positive declarations of the CIA Director at face value.

2) Lying about WMDs in Iraq makes no logical sense. We’re supposed to believe that the Bush admin. Lied to justify an invasion…that would inevitably reveal that lie to the world.
The ONLY explanation I’ve heard regarding this from the “Bush lied” people is that “they figured the war would be so popular that no one would care”. Which is ridiculous beyond belief.

Were there WMDs in Iraq at the time of the invasion? Almost certainly not. But the CIA Director said there were and any president would be foolish not to act on that claim.

If your oncologist insists that you have cancer do you ask to see the lab reports yourself and interview the lab techs? Of course not! Probably you schedule surgery or chemo whichever that same doctor recommends.
Were mistakes made during the occupation of Iraq that cost thousands of American lives? Most certainly. But that is another issue that has nothing to do about the legitimacy of the invasion.

Did the Bush admin. Emphasize the stronger parts of their argument in favor of invading? Of course they did! This is what you do when making a case to a jury or to the American people. You have no obligation to argue both sides. There were plenty of opponents of the invasion to argue the other side.

Either way, there is ZERO evidence that the Bush Admin. ever deliberately and knowingly promoted false information to justify the invasion of Iraq.

Bush listened to advisors, as did the Dems at the time, and they were all on the same page. Obama claims to not know anything until he sees it on the news, yet they let him get away with that.

The Dems seem to be asking us to believe that they were so cooperative with Bush that they never questioned anything he told them. That is incredible!! They all had the same information, discussed it and made the decision. No Dems were pressured. If anyone thinks that the Dems in Washington ever blindly went along with any Repubs, then you're dreaming. Never has and never will happen.

Considering that congress was in agreement, they ALL take equal responsibility for what happened. If the information turned out to be false, then it would be on the Clinton appointee.

Obama has screwed many things up. You cannot blame any of his policies on the Republicans since they did question things and refused to get on board with Obamacare and other idiotic things.

 

[KNB]

Did Republicans question the big government USAPATRIOT Act and domestic spying?

 

[rightwinger]

After 9-11 we gave Bush a 9-11 Card

It allowed him to do anything he thought necessary to fight terrorism. We gave him the Patriot Act, Homeland Security, Afghanistan and even looked the other way when he engaged in torture

But what Bush really wanted was Iraq. But nobody could link Iraq to 9-11. So what could Bush do?

Claim that Saddam was going to give WMDs to terrorists. We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.

Bush lied

 

[Dayton3]

After 9-11 we gave Bush a 9-11 Card

It allowed him to do anything he thought necessary to fight terrorism. We gave him the Patriot Act, Homeland Security, Afghanistan and even looked the other way when he engaged in torture

But what Bush really wanted was Iraq. But nobody could link Iraq to 9-11. So what could Bush do?

Claim that Saddam was going to give WMDs to terrorists. We don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud.

Bush lied

Actual evidence of that from an unbiased source?

 

[Billo_Really]

If anyone cares to see "all" the lies the Bush Administration told, as they happened, one after the other,
leading up to the Iraq war, they can find it here...


Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq



Why anyone would listen to these fuckers again, is beyond me.

 

[Dayton3]

If anyone cares to see "all" the lies the Bush Administration told, as they happened, one after the other,
leading up to the Iraq war, they can find it here...


Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq



Why anyone would listen to these fuckers again, is beyond me.

Mother Jones is not a credible source. They were against invading Iraq long before the issue of WMDs was settled.

 

[Billo_Really]

Mother Jones is not a credible source. They were against invading Iraq long before the issue of WMDs was settled.

And ad hominems are not valid rebuttals.

 

[rightwinger]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/27/washington/27intel.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


“There was never a serious debate that I know of within the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat,” Mr. Tenet writes in a devastating judgment that is likely to be debated for many years. Nor, he adds, “was there ever a significant discussion” about the possibility of containing Iraq without an invasion.

Mr. Tenet admits that he made his famous “slam dunk” remark about the evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. But he argues that the quote was taken out of context and that it had little impact on President Bush’s decision to go to war. He also makes clear his bitter view that the administration made him a scapegoat for the Iraq war.

 

[Lakhota]

If anyone cares to see "all" the lies the Bush Administration told, as they happened, one after the other,
leading up to the Iraq war, they can find it here...


Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq



Why anyone would listen to these fuckers again, is beyond me.

Mother Jones is not a credible source. They were against invading Iraq long before the issue of WMDs was settled.

Who is a "credible" source in your mind?

 

[Lakhota]

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction - Salon.com

 

[jknowgood]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/27/washington/27intel.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


“There was never a serious debate that I know of within the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat,” Mr. Tenet writes in a devastating judgment that is likely to be debated for many years. Nor, he adds, “was there ever a significant discussion” about the possibility of containing Iraq without an invasion.

Mr. Tenet admits that he made his famous “slam dunk” remark about the evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. But he argues that the quote was taken out of context and that it had little impact on President Bush’s decision to go to war. He also makes clear his bitter view that the administration made him a scapegoat for the Iraq war.

Bush gave Saddam plenty of time to prove he didn't have wmd's, he chose to bluff and paid the ultimate price. I'm glad he is gone, but not glad obama screwed it up.

 

[Lakhota]

Rightwingers like to distract from the event that Bush tried to link Saddam to - 9/11. Even the dumbest of rightwingers should now be convinced that Saddam HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH 9/11. However, if any of them still think so - please provide credible proof.

It ain't rocket science...

 

[rightwinger]

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/04/27/washington/27intel.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0


“There was never a serious debate that I know of within the administration about the imminence of the Iraqi threat,” Mr. Tenet writes in a devastating judgment that is likely to be debated for many years. Nor, he adds, “was there ever a significant discussion” about the possibility of containing Iraq without an invasion.

Mr. Tenet admits that he made his famous “slam dunk” remark about the evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. But he argues that the quote was taken out of context and that it had little impact on President Bush’s decision to go to war. He also makes clear his bitter view that the administration made him a scapegoat for the Iraq war.

Bush gave Saddam plenty of time to prove he didn't have wmd's, he chose to bluff and paid the ultimate price. I'm glad he is gone, but not glad obama screwed it up.

UN weapon inspector Hans Blix told Bush he did not think Saddam had the weapons Bush said he did. He requested more time to prove it. Bush invaded before the UN inspectors could remove his reason for invading

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_and_weapons_of_mass_destruction

 

[ron4342]

The Bush Administration Never Lied In Order to Justify the Invasion of Iraq

The entire mantra of “Bush lied, people died” has been the refrain of critics of the Iraq War and the Bush Admin. For years. It has been repeatedly used in an attempt to destroy the Bush Admin. And delegitimize the U.S. led invasion for years.
Allowing this to go unchallenged was one of the greatest mistakes of the Bush Admin.
And on two separate levels the claim simply does not hold up.

1) Before the U.S. led invasion, President Bush questioned CIA Director George Tenet about the evidence supporting the existence of WMDs in Iraq. According to the Bob Woodward book, Tenet exclaimed that it was a “slam dunk” in favor of evidence showing WMDs.
What was President Bush supposed to do? Tenet was a Clinton appointee with no reason to lie or suck up to Bush.
The only answer I’ve ever been given is that Bush should’ve looked at the intelligence sources himself. This is completely ridiculous. A president does not go around interviewing Iraqi dissidents.
President Bush would’ve been foolish not to take the positive declarations of the CIA Director at face value.

2) Lying about WMDs in Iraq makes no logical sense. We’re supposed to believe that the Bush admin. Lied to justify an invasion…that would inevitably reveal that lie to the world.
The ONLY explanation I’ve heard regarding this from the “Bush lied” people is that “they figured the war would be so popular that no one would care”. Which is ridiculous beyond belief.

Were there WMDs in Iraq at the time of the invasion? Almost certainly not. But the CIA Director said there were and any president would be foolish not to act on that claim.

If your oncologist insists that you have cancer do you ask to see the lab reports yourself and interview the lab techs? Of course not! Probably you schedule surgery or chemo whichever that same doctor recommends.
Were mistakes made during the occupation of Iraq that cost thousands of American lives? Most certainly. But that is another issue that has nothing to do about the legitimacy of the invasion.

Did the Bush admin. Emphasize the stronger parts of their argument in favor of invading? Of course they did! This is what you do when making a case to a jury or to the American people. You have no obligation to argue both sides. There were plenty of opponents of the invasion to argue the other side.

Either way, there is ZERO evidence that the Bush Admin. ever deliberately and knowingly promoted false information to justify the invasion of Iraq.

Either bush lied or he was incompetent. Of course, he could have been an incompetent liar. Regardless of what you choose it will not bring back the 4,400 killled because of his lie/incompetence. Neither will it restore the 10's of thousands who were wounded and had their lives destroyed.
And as for cheney, the man should be charged, arrested, tried, convicted and shot for being a war profiteer. It was no accident that Halliburton just happened to be ramped up and ready to go to war and it was no accident that Halliburton received NO-BID contracts for that war. And finally it was no accident that the value of cheney's stock in Haliburton increased by huge amounts. cheney's actions led directly to his making huge profits on the war and that is war profiteering. Cutting off his arms and legs before hanging him would be to kind considering all the pain and agony he brought to this country.