Cheney predicted Iraq would be a quagmire. Does that make him an un-patriotic traitor?

Question

"Because if we'd gone to Baghdad we would have been all alone. There wouldn't have been anybody else with us. There would have been a U.S. occupation of Iraq. None of the Arab forces that were willing to fight with us in Kuwait were willing to invade Iraq.

Once you got to Iraq and took it over, took down Saddam Hussein's government, then what are you going to put in its place? That's a very volatile part of the world, and if you take down the central government of Iraq, you could very easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off: part of it, the Syrians would like to have to the west, part of it -- eastern Iraq -- the Iranians would like to claim, they fought over it for eight years. In the north you've got the Kurds, and if the Kurds spin loose and join with the Kurds in Turkey, then you threaten the territorial integrity of Turkey.

It's a quagmire if you go that far and try to take over Iraq."

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003624798

Answer 1

Seven words: twenty million dollar "retirement package" from Halliburton.

That matters more than common sense to Cheney. The world may have changed in some ways, but the situation is still the quagmire he described.

Answer 2

No, it was planning and executing 9/11 that makes Cheney an unpatriotic traitor. Al Qaeda does exist, but what most of you don't realize is that it's headed by Dick Cheney, not bin Laden.

Predicting that Iraq would be a quagmire might be one of the only times we've seen Cheney tell the truth.

Answer 3

Not in 1994, it didn't, no.

Of course, the world has changed a bit in the last 13 years, hasn't it?

Answer 4

No you're just believing that LIEberal news BS again. When will you EVER learn?

Answer 5

Yes according to neo-standards. Also his five deferments would make him a coward.