You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #29: The problem was that some of what he said contradicted [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu May-17-07 08:38 AM
Response to Reply #12
29. The problem was that some of what he said contradicted
what he said in the late 1990s after the inspectors were out.

The other thing was that even if you knew with certainty what he said was true, it said nothing of any possible effort on Saddam's part from 1998 on. Could Saddam have smuggled stuff from the former USSR? They had unsecured nuclear weapons that people like Senators Nunn and Lugar adviced buying up faster than we are. (Remember the first debate - Kerry responded nuclear proliferation as the greatest threat in the first debate and Bush ineptly tried to repeat Kerry's answer)

Read some of the speeches on the Iwr or Levin - no one ruled out possible WMD. I think nobody disagreed on the lead to get inspectors back in. Where the disagreement was was on what language to put into a resolution. Once Leiberman and Gephardt backed the IWR, the key amendment was Durbin's. This was a simple, straight forward amendment that put Bush's promise - that only WMD would be a cause to go to war explicitly into the bill. (Implicitly it was there as wording was removed that described other reasons.)

When we knew EXPLICITLY that Bush lied about why he invaded was after his 2005 swearing in, when people like Dr Rice and other administration people openly argued that they invaded to spread democracy, the theme of Bush's highly praised innaugral address. Very few papers or people noted this change in reason. (I heard the 2 MA Senators and Dean). There was no outrage from the media and none from the mainstream of the country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC