Do democrats/liberals actually believe that Iraq wasn't a legitimate threat?

Question

WASHINGTON - Democrats seized on North Korea's brazen act to criticize President Bush's record in confronting the communist regime, contending the administration's focus on Iraq ignored legitimate threats.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061010/ap_on_el_ge/us_north_korea_politics

did they forget what they said a few years ago...
http://www.glennbeck.com/news/01302004.shtml

Answer 1

no, they are just playing the game of politics.

Answer 2

I am proud an happy to say I am not a liberal, or a democrat. I am a Conservative (NOT a republican!) and I know for a fact that Saddam was not a threat. I knew this in 2002. It was clear to anyone that could see beyond their paranoid delusions that Iraq was not a threat to us then, but it is NOW! Bush claimed that terrorists where being trained under saddams regime there. This was a lie. Terrorists did train in Kurdish controlled areas. Some form of Al-queda operatives where in the USA supported Kurdish controlled north, but Saddam was NOT a threat.

NOW, however, those pesky al-queda people are pouring forth from Iraq's terrorist training schools faster than the west can kill them. WOOHOO what a big success. NOT!

And yes, Bush has ignored Korea, in fact he has been utterly wreckless and stupid in how he dealt with The very real danger of a deranged dictator who actually has WMD and now has nukes.

This diplomatic f.uckup from Bush is inexcusable. He lied about Iraq. The Democrats in Congress and the Senate CRAVENLY supported him and used an excuse that intelligence was clear (it was not) that Saddam was a threat.

Intelligence agents on the ground, and up to senior levels where constantly asking for proof of what Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice where saying, because they could not qualify it. Not from their sources. But Rummy and Cheney had set up offices outside of normal channels and where inveniting intelligence. cherry-picking form what was doubtful, making it real and adding lies on top taken from Iraqi's who had not been in Iraq for decades. EVERY claim they made was debunked before the invasion, but the mainstream media ignored or played down these facts, and chose to report the Cheney/Rumsfeld lies as fact.



It was all a lie.

The answerman above is correct!

Answer 3

I am not a lib or a Dem. The leader of Iraq was a dictator who was committing genocide and I certainly do not regret our removing him from office. I would just like to see what exactly we are planning to accomplish in Iraq, set some goals, reach these goals and get the heck out of there. As soon as reasonably possible. I think our pursuit of Bin Laden is justified and should not be abandoned. I am a patriot, but I am seriously beginning to think an exit strategy for Iraq would be a good idea. How about you?

Answer 4

have not you seen the bumper sticky label? "while any each and every physique is enslaved, no person is definitely unfastened." Tyranny everywhere is a risk to the country, because of the fact terror, like fungus, grows interior the lifeless of evening corners of the international. Is "Afghanistan" going to invade the country? No. If we pull all our troops out and the Taliban takes over the country, will Al Queda have a shelter to launch assaults from? sure. sunlight Tzu says to attack the enemy's skill to make conflict against you, so as that's what we could do. while Afghanistan is solid sufficient to maintain the crazies out of business enterprise without our help, then our troops can pass away with a sparkling judgment of right and incorrect. Iraq is a component of an analogous conflict, if in basic terms because of the fact we've made it so, yet there are different motives (Saddam's harboring of the Ansar Al-Islam terror cellular, for one). Why make it so? because of the fact once you have numerical superiority, you prefer to *advance your front*. enticing the enemy on a huge front suppresses their pastime, will advance their casualties, and a great deal weakens the earnings of an underdog.

Answer 5

apples to oranges buddy... north korea is actually a threat to world peace, while iraq had already been marginalized in the first gulf war... and let's not forget - we liberals were pointing to the threat that north korea posed as a reason why wasting time in iraq was a bad idea. now we're bogged down there and we can't do a damn thing to stop n. korea from becoming a nuclear power.

did you forget to listen to what we said a few years ago?

Answer 6

Yes, we believe it was no threat. At the time the Bush junta tried to drum up support for their war on oil, disguised as war on terror, we had a suspicion that Bush was wrong. The so called evidence they presented were sketchy at best. In a court a second semester law student could have dismantled the evidence Colin Powell was embarrassed to present to the United Nations.

Then we knew it was wrong and now we know it was wrong. The war on Iraq was a criminal act and remains a criminal act. We have violated international law by attacking a sovereign country, that was admittedly a rouge state, but contained and unable to harm the U.S. at all. Their only fault was that they had oil and wanted to retire the petro-dollar and use the euro instead.

Answer 7

Falling asleep with these repeats.

This is an oldie and not a goodie.

If you(bush) lie and lie and lie, you cant claim later on that you were the victim of faulty intel. You twisted arms to get the faulty intel.

Then you sent Colin Powell off with the lies.

Then you ignored the Weapons Inspectors and Invaded anyway.

Answer 8

How, in the name of sanity, was Iraq a threat to the US? An international pain in the ***, yes, but a threat, I sure can't see it. North Korea on the other hand is a different story.

Answer 9

Actually such leading Liberal Democrats such as John Kerry & Joe Lieberman supported the Attack on Iraq so until you learn to read beyoind the ConservativeReview you should stiffle yourself.

Peace...

Answer 10

Faulty intelligence from the Bush administration.

Answer 11

Any sane thinking person agrees that Iraq was not a threat and was one only in the eyes of Bush and his cronies.