for believing that Iraq had Weapons of Mass Destruction (of which there were some found, old or not), would that then make the Democrats (Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and others) who voted to approve the war, liars as well?
Or are those Democrats who believed that Iraq had WMDs just gullible?
2007-01-18 14:22:28 · 12 answers · asked by The Cult of Personality 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Alex Ph.D.,
I agree with you completely...just trying to make a point to those who always proclaim President Bush to be a liar.
2007-01-18 14:30:14 · update #1
I don't see how faulty intelligence makes anyone a liar (though Kerry surely would qualify as a liar before Bush ever would)
2007-01-18 14:27:29 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
Bush would be a liar if he believed or had reason to know there were not WMD sufficient to be an imminent threat to the US or to vital US national interests. The others would be cowards if they knew Bush was lying and did not stand up to the pressure for fear of being painted as weak on defense. But did Congress have the "same intelligence" as Bush, or did they see a glitzy persuasive presentation of cherry picked information that presented only one side. If you're a phd you should be able to look at the logic of this. Can one really think this powerful executive shows all of his intelligence to Congress
2007-01-18 22:24:55 · answer #2 · answered by Red Herring 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
They believed the faulty intelligence which was presented to them as fact by the Bush administration. If you watched Bush's 60 minutes interview he said there were no WMD's found. That is straight from the horses mouth. What will it take to convince you?
2007-01-18 14:29:59 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
That record became extra opinion about preserving hands really than the dealings between them. you opt for to forgive the murders. i have self assurance questions like those are a sorry excuse for a citizen to submit. no longer all the information are on the table. Your very last section. i do no longer! I heard maximum each word of the speeches to Congress and the UN, even this recent record. no you may make you chuffed.
2016-11-25 19:33:30 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not really because the democrats will claim that Bush made them vote for the war instead of them being able to make up their own mind. Bush is now being blamed for the way congress voted.
2007-01-18 14:35:38 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
Do you mean the same people who have been quoted on tape saying that Saddam was a threat during the Clinton administration?
Liberals believe what they want to believe, not what is true.
2007-01-18 22:41:34 · answer #6 · answered by Chainsaw 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
No, it wouldn't .. because they voted the way they did because Bush assured everyone in his many speeches that , yes.. Iraq had WM D's and were within minutes of using them.... he used scare tactics, he knew he did, and he knew he was lying...No.. this mess lies at Bush's feet.. now and always.
2007-01-18 14:30:45 · answer #7 · answered by Debra H 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Hypothetically, can you imagine the outcry and condemnation, indignation and outright self-serving political bombardment the democrats and media would lay on us if there was any - and I mean - ANY - valid or verifiable information out there that supported this premise?
Just another example that demonstrates that the liberals don't need any proof to constantly spew forth their rhetoric.
2007-01-18 14:40:48 · answer #8 · answered by LeAnne 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
There is no hypothetical reason or assumption, he is a liar, he has done it for so long it is everyday usage for him and we the people are the ones suffering, I am not leaving out the military here they are suffering the most for his lies and greediness.
2007-01-18 14:35:53 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 1⤋
Well John Kerry Voted for the war "before he voted against the war" REMEMBER... LOL!
2007-01-18 14:26:20 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋