If it comes out?

Question

If, during the course of the Scooter Libby perjury trial, it comes out that the Bush administration did, in fact, suppress intelligence that would've weakened it's case for invading Iraq, will the war supporters finally admit the invasion of Iraq was a horrible mistake? What if witnesses admit that it was on Bush's agenda prior to 9/11 to invade Iraq? Even if that happens, how many will still say, "It was the right thing to do".

Steve K - Dude, you DON'T invade a country for THIS!!!

"I think at the end of the day your going to find that no one knew if Saddam had WMD's or not. But that's irrelevant since he was in violation of UN law from the beginning and should have been taken out of power during Clinton's administration."

Ooops, I meant Stone.

Randy C - I think you need to pee into a cup for this comment.

"Once the average Iraqi begins to receive his personal oil revenue check the Iranian and Syrian peoples are going to want theirs too."

Answer 1

Is Clinton going to admit he was weak on Saddam and osama bin laden? and that he covered up the fact by having his man steal and destroy documents from the national archive?

I think at the end of the day your going to find that no one knew if Saddam had WMD's or not. But that's irrelevant since he was in violation of UN law from the beginning and should have been taken out of power during Clinton's administration.

BTW it was the right thing to do, just because Clinton didn't have the spine to act does not mean it was the wrong course of action.

Go read the UN sanctions and laws set up against Saddam and tell me the US was not in the right, even if the rest of the world was in Saddam's pocket.

Add on: So when do you go after a man who is in violation of the law? the man spat in the face of the world for a decade, then acts surprised when people react?

How should a world act when the UN resolutuions say allow us to inspect or be removed from power, and that person constantly breaks the laws?

If Saddam had nothing to hide why did he constantly kick out the UN inspectors? why did he not allow them to complete their tasks, prov he was not producing the weapons, and then the sanction would have been lifted and he would still be in power.

Answer: he had the weapons, he was trying to conceal them from the world.

look deeper in to people's motives rather than get blinded by your politics.

Answer 2

Regardless if it was a lie or not I feel it needed to be done.
I'm glad the sadist Saddam is gone. I'm glad we are there. This is about Iran. Afghanistan to their east and Iraq on their western border we are in great positioning to take them out.
The Iranian government has supported terrorism since 1979. The are the benefactors of terrorism.
A free Iraq truly is their worst nightmare.

American truth warrior I figured as much from you. I didn't expect you to be able to read through the lines......If we went directly to the source"Iran", We would have sustained far more casualties than in Iraq.

This way Iran can be taken out politically rather than with conventional weapons and troops.

Whether it was a lie or false intel that got us there it is what needed to be done.

Once the average Iraqi begins to receive his personal oil revenue check the Iranian and Syrian peoples are going to want theirs too.

Destabilization of Iran and Syria are the keys to reducing the river of monies flowing to extremist regimes to a trickle.

We are safer today because most of these funds are going towards defending themselves rather than perpetuating an eventual true Jihad.

Answer 3

Current administration policy remains:

Admit noting, Deny everything.

With the current US law, they are the only ones that still have a right to remain silent.

We are already seeing the Congressional and Senate rats jumping from their sinking ship with comments like,"I supported the war at first, but..." and "Given the information I had at the time....".

I had no classified briefings or specific current information, but I knew Iraq posed no threat to the US citizenry.

Politician's and Voter's ability to willingly suspend belief, in spite of overwhelming evidence to the contrary amazes me.

Eventually, we will have a reasonably accurate accounting of who said and did what when, and like with 9/11, anyone who disputes the official story, as released, will be branded a Bush hater or conspiracy theorist.

If there was a conspiracy, that means it is not a conspiracy theory.

Answer 4

The idea to go to Iraq I agree was flawed. I know of no one that will not say they wished we had just stayed away from Iraq. Having said that, we should have never allowed Saddam to violate the cease fire agreementsas many times as we did. We should have never allowed the sanctions placed against him to be broken. We went in and removed their government. Now it is our duty and obligation to help their government stand and be able to protect the country of Iraq from enemies both foreign and domestic. As soon as this can be sone, we need to get the hell out of Iraq!

Answer 5

We're chasing so-called "terrorists" across the entire world in a never-ending search for nonexistent WMDs. It's like a one-size-fits-all enemy. Shooting Iraqis who've taken up arms because they've been displaced from their homes is bad, but shooting terrorists is good! Invading US citizens' privacy by tapping their phones while they call their loved ones vacationing overseas is bad, but tapping terrorists' phones is good! As soon as we call our enemies terrorists, not only is it okay to kill stab maim torture beat burn bludgeon them to death, it's our sacred responsibility as Americans!

So you see, as long as we're fighting terrorists abroad, it absolutely was the right thing to do.

Personally, I feel content knowing that I have an enemy for all occasions. I also get the creeping suspicion that you're assuming we're capable of rational thought. What on earth do you take us for?