Why do liberals say that Bush lied when all evidence points to the fact that he absolutely did not?

Question

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=22958

An incredible amount of evidence has been collected that prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that Bush was correct in saying 3 things about Iraq. They had WMD, they were linked to Al Queda, and they had a nuclear program involving yellow cake uranium from africa. When the 9/11 commission denied these things (without bothering to actually examine the evidence, I might add), marxist throughout the world jumped on the Bush lied band wagon. However, the evidence tells a different story and the 9/11 commission is looking pretty stupid these days. The evidence is actually growing of a direct link between Hussein and 9/11 and it is pretty obvious that Hussein supplied Al Queda with all of its money via the Oil for Food scandel. Further, he had trained thousands of terrorists to come here and make 9/11 a weekly occurance. Those people are now dead....killed by our troops in Iraq.

Answer 1

Yeah....I guess 2 out of 3 isn't so bad...everyone gets lucky sometimes. Yada-Yada-Yada

"Those people are now dead....killed by our troops in Iraq."

....and how many of our troops have been killed to date, huh?
How many family members and friends have YOU lost for this, Oh-So Justworthy cause?

Go back to sucking on Bush's big toe, you moron!
AND WATCH SOME REAL NEWS FOR A CHANGE!

Answer 2

hmm, where have you been the last three years? The commission was a bipartisan group that researched every aspect that they could think of on this deal:

1) NO weapons of mass destruction were ever found, by the commission or by the troops. I really hope you were being sarcastic with that one.

2) There was NO link to Al Queda. Where are you getting your information from?

3) Africa, U-235? what? NO NO NO There is no evidence, let alone you claim an "incredible amount of evidence".

By the way, the US is contributing money to terrorist organizations every day when we purchase our oil from the middle east. Are you out on the street corner advocating for green energy?

Also, by the way, it is not only liberals who are claiming Bush is incompetent. All you have to do is look at the poll numbers.

I'm not saying Bush lied (and I'm a member of the "other" party), I am saying that he was incompetent by ignoring select MI to formulate a plan that he was hell-bent on completing, his daddy's failed mission, Gulf War Part I.

It is good Hussein is done with, but the problems we have created in the method that we have chosen to use are probably worse.

Do your own research, and stop listening to Fox news so much, ok?

Answer 3

I don't even know how you can say that. It's preposterous. Over the last few years, we have had so many people, like Richard Clark (who is no liberal) and other high-up CIA operatives, who said that they brought the Bush Administration all kinds on intellegence that pointed to the fact that Sadam did NOT have WMD's, and that he had no plans to attack America. More and more of these people have come to light, and they're not Michael Moore, they are career CIA people and others who were just so disgusted by the lies, and they're also sick of hearing that it was "poor intelligence" when they were doing their jobs well.
What they said was that the Administration ignored any fact that did not support their claims of Saddam's WMD's. Richard Clark said (in front of Congress, so he wasn't lying) that on Sept. 12, Dubya pulled him into a room and said, "How can we use this to go to war with Iraq?"
It's clear: the Neo-cons wanted to go to war with Iraq from before Dubya became president. They said so, wrote articles about it, etc, so it's not a secret. 9/11 happened, and these guys saw it as a blank check to do what they wanted.
This shouldn't be a political issue. There was no connection between Saddam & 9/11. As an American, despite your political viewpoint, you should be pissed about this. They've put America in danger, if you love your country, don't stick your head in the sand!

Answer 4

Bush may be stupid...but Iraq did have WMD's prior to the war. Ever see the pictures of the Kurds that he gassed? Ever see the pictures of the Iranians that he gassed?

I find it interesting that under Clinton the Democrats were up in arms about Saddam. I saw interviews with all of the main Democrat players from that time (including Kerry). They ALL stated that Saddam had WMD's, and that he WAS a threat. Plus, SOMETHING should be done about him. Thats why they voted IN FAVOR of going to war with Iraq. However, once the war started, and the far-left Bush haters began voicing their concerns, plus no WMD's were found, they did an about-face.

Now, several of Saddam's former Generals have stated they thought they did have WMD's...they planned on using them against American troops. They were SHOCKED when he told them "No", that they were all gone. Now, some of those same Generals stated they believe the WMD's were shipped to neighboring countries (Syria?) for safekeeping. Where was the "unbiased" media in covering what these Generals had to say?

I will say that Bush has done A VERY POOR job of selling his administration, and their policies. When they went into Iraq they recovered THOUSANDS of documents. They didn't even pay any attention to them. They sat for a few years; finally someone decided to look at them. The documents are still providing light on Iraq's WMD program. Who knows what will be found out later???

The sad fact is that the Democrats thought he had WMD's, they thought he was a threat, they caved-in to the far-left anti-war faction, and they hated Bush-they can't very well agree on him with anything now can they? The only MAN among the Democrats has been Joe Lieberman...he has stuck to his guns and his votes...and now you see how his party treats him. Heartless b@st@rds.

Answer 5

I am a liberal and I dont think bush neccesarily lied, but he did act on faulty intelligence. I do think it is highly possible that saddam had WMD's considering that the regean administration supplield his regime with them during the Iran/Iraq war. Could you please elaborate on the growing evidence of the Al Queda saddam link? Because throughout their history Saddam and AL queda have been mortal enemies. please do elaborate maybe there is something i dont know. as for the uranium thing i have no knowledge of it so i wont say anything. I agree saddam was a threat to stability in the middle east. But i dont think now was the right time for war, and i dont think iraq was the right place for us to start such a massive campaign. When there are larger threats to stability like syria (which prob has iraq's WMD's) and iran

Answer 6

I was in the first Gulf war and I can tell you beyond a shadow of a doubt we removed WMD's from Kuwait that the Iraqis left behind as they retreated. I am sure that Saddam did not commit all of his assets In Kuwait so there had to be a reasonable amount of chemical weapons still in Iraq post Desert Storm. I can't tell you where they went but I have have seen no evidence that they were destroyed.

Answer 7

Possibly for the same reasons conservatives say Liberals support terrorism, are treasonous, hate the military, are Communist/Socialist, etc...essentially to piss each other off.

I can tell you that while I don't believe Bush "lied" per se, I do believe he rushed to make a decision he had already decide upon before taking office.

Further, I am a liberal (proudly so) I'm a veteran of 15 years military service, I fought in the Gulf War and I can tell you that I'm NOT in support of terrorists, I'm NOT treasonous, I DON'T hate the military, nor am I a Communist/Socialist...

Yet I disagree completely with this administration's policies, direction, attitude and actions...what does this make me? I'd say pretty PATRIOTIC....

Perhaps if we'd ever learn to stop the BS rhetoric, name calling, and pandering, we might actually be able to accomplish something, but I'm not too hopeful. How can we "nation build" when we can't even get our own countrymen to come together?

Answer 8

Just face the facts folks... Ron Reagan is trying to claw his way out of the grave right now. This moron we have for a so called world leader has been lying about Iraq from the Minuit he opened his smirking mouth. THERE WERE NO WMD PERIOD. The UN
weapons inspectors told us that BEFORE the war. Do you honestly think a man of great integrity like Colin Powell would have really just resigned his post because he was a little tired of public life? He had served his country all of his life. He left because the fascists he was working forced him out. Dr. Evil
( DICK Cheney) and his cronies are the ones that wanted war...
MO MONEY MO MONEY MO MONEY.

Answer 9

Because it took the fascists in the White House a couple of years to bribe people to lie and plant evidence. I'm actually surprised (ok, no I'm not these morons even suck at being tyrants) that it took so long for them to start planting evidence and paying off former Iraqi generals to make up stories about how Saddam sent WMDs to Syria. I guess they didn't want to rush it. Their plan to take over the Mid East isn't going as quickly as they had planned, so they have to work their way up to each new stage. It turns out conquering a region isn't as easy as their hero Hitler made it look.

Answer 10

Because you guys insulting us and calling us Marxists is just too much fun!

According to your article "The four-page, July 2002 letter examined by the U.S. Army corroborates the link between Rahman and Saddam’s regime. It also implies a connection and the coordination of activities among Pakistan, Libya, Iraq and the Taliban."

THEN EXPLAIN THIS:

It was reported that Libya has now been taken off the U.S. terrorism supporters list. US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice says, "We are taking these actions in recognition of Libya’s continued commitment to its renunciation of terrorism and the excellent cooperation Libya has provided to the United States and other members of the international community in response to common global threats faced by the civilized world since September 11, 2001."

Answer 11

How do you sleep 24 hours an afternoon yet nevertheless be able to ask questions approximately Yahoo. His administration lied approximately many stuff which includes the Al Qaeda-Iraq hyperlink. Duh, Saddam became a secularist, what might he decide for with a team of non secular fundamentalists. They mentioned saddam became procuring uranium and attempting to fabricate nuclear weapons. Umm, in case you basically ignored the total Libby component. certainly they uncovered her disguise because of the fact she advised them the fact, no longer what they had to take heed to. basically seem. there's a lot greater evidence in case you seem at the same time with your eyes open. and of course you less expensive the Downing memo because of the fact it says that they've been manipulating the info to greater healthful their coverage. even while the info for sure did no longer help their schedule. "besides the undeniable fact that some components of the U. S. media have portrayed the document as faked or fraudulent, no good components have puzzled its accuracy or disputed its authenticity, regardless of being puzzled rapidly approximately it on dissimilar activities. the two uk and US officers have in view that the two refused to be certain or deny its content textile, in any different case have tacitly examined its authenticity (as while Tony Blair replied to a press convention question by asserting "That memo became written earlier we went to the UN.")" Why might Tony Blair be commenting on something that would not exist.