...why didn't he feel the need to share those reasons with the rest of us until much later in the invasion?
After all, a reason is something you're aware of before you take action. Logically, if you come up with a reason after you've acted, that's not a reason - that's an excuse.
So Bush had all these good reasons to invade Iraq, besides the (non-existent) weapons of mass destruction, so that it doesn't really matter that they're not there, it was still a good decision: Spread democracy, fight terrorism on its home turf, create a reverse-domino effect in the Middle-East, avenge his dad, etc...
During the period before the war, Bush was working hard making a case for the war. But all he ever told the American People, the U.N., the coalition of the willing, Congress... about what WMDs (and an attempt to kill his dad). So since he had all these good reasons, why wouldn't he have used them back then to make his case?
2007-09-14
00:30:25
·
17 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics