Look we could sit here and quibble all day long about what the definition of "lie" is, and whether or not Bush did it. Thats really missing the big picture.
Bush2 sat on national television, across all the networks, and gave several 10-15 minute speeches to the american public about the weapons of mass destruction that saddam currently had and was about to use against us. it was a scare tactic against the US people, and it worked. when you listen to what he said, and how he said it, all that gets conjured up in your head is "oh crap, saddam's got nukes sitting on the top of ICBMs in fully functional silo's around the country, all pointed at the US??? go get him george!"
all bush was trying to do was scare us. scare us into wanting to goto war, beause fear is power. when you make people afraid, you can do anything to them in the name of protecting them, including taking all their rights away (patriot act anyone? homeland security?). that is simply just not right. fear is how hitler got the normal, rationally minded german people to go along with his war march.
one barrel of mustard gas is not a weapon of "MASS" destruction, i'm sorry but it just isn't. They had weapons, possibly. But they definitly did not have the resources to distribute those weapons in any kind of "mass destructive" way. Thats the real issue here. Its the fact that bush blew the entire thing waaaaaaaay out of proportion and made the whole issue seem much much much more terrifying and real of a threat than it is.
so thats what he was lying about, and thats what bothers me about what he did.
Also the fact that, once we were actually engaged in iraq, and it started to become apparent to the US public that, no kids, in fact there isn't any kind of real, imminent threat sitting in a warehouse in iraq, did the war become about liberating the iraqi people. why did the bush administration feel it necessary to change their story mid-war? if bush got our approval for the war by telling us iraq had WMD's and was gonna use them, but then once we're IN the war, now all of a sudden its to free iraq? why dont you free tibet instead, and stop sending this country into senseless wars.
iraq was not and is not any kind of real threat to the US. they simply don't have the means to be one. the only thing iraq was a threat to was it's own people, and the surrounding middle eastern countries. i really don't understand why the right doesn't understand that the middle east is a bad place to be mucking around in. you gotta treat them suckers with kid gloves, not sledgehammers.
if we want to neutralize real threats to this country, we should be focusing on places like north korea or china.
Bush2 sat on national television, across all the networks, and gave several 10-15 minute speeches to the american public about the weapons of mass destruction that saddam currently had and was about to use against us. it was a scare tactic against the US people, and it worked. when you listen to what he said, and how he said it, all that gets conjured up in your head is "oh crap, saddam's got nukes sitting on the top of ICBMs in fully functional silo's around the country, all pointed at the US??? go get him george!"
all bush was trying to do was scare us. scare us into wanting to goto war, beause fear is power. when you make people afraid, you can do anything to them in the name of protecting them, including taking all their rights away (patriot act anyone? homeland security?). that is simply just not right. fear is how hitler got the normal, rationally minded german people to go along with his war march.
one barrel of mustard gas is not a weapon of "MASS" destruction, i'm sorry but it just isn't. They had weapons, possibly. But they definitly did not have the resources to distribute those weapons in any kind of "mass destructive" way. Thats the real issue here. Its the fact that bush blew the entire thing waaaaaaaay out of proportion and made the whole issue seem much much much more terrifying and real of a threat than it is.
so thats what he was lying about, and thats what bothers me about what he did.
Also the fact that, once we were actually engaged in iraq, and it started to become apparent to the US public that, no kids, in fact there isn't any kind of real, imminent threat sitting in a warehouse in iraq, did the war become about liberating the iraqi people. why did the bush administration feel it necessary to change their story mid-war? if bush got our approval for the war by telling us iraq had WMD's and was gonna use them, but then once we're IN the war, now all of a sudden its to free iraq? why dont you free tibet instead, and stop sending this country into senseless wars.
iraq was not and is not any kind of real threat to the US. they simply don't have the means to be one. the only thing iraq was a threat to was it's own people, and the surrounding middle eastern countries. i really don't understand why the right doesn't understand that the middle east is a bad place to be mucking around in. you gotta treat them suckers with kid gloves, not sledgehammers.
if we want to neutralize real threats to this country, we should be focusing on places like north korea or china.
Comment