Bush - "The threat comes from Iraq. It arises directly from the Iraqi regime's own actions, its history of aggression and its drive toward an arsenal of terror. "
Not at all a lie. Iraq has in the past several decades been one of the most aggressive and destructive countries in the region. The only reason it has not been the aggressor in recent years is that it is held in check by overwhelming US military power. In any case it is a threat. If we washed our hands of the area it could invade Kuwait again or some other country. Iraq does support terrorism. It has chemical weapons and apparently bio weapons and is seeking nukes. Its run by an aggressive dictator who has shown that the only language he understand is the language of force.
Bush - " Eleven years ago, as a condition for ending the Persian Gulf War, the Iraqi regime was required to destroy its weapons of mass destruction, to cease all development of such weapons and to stop all support for terrorist groups. "
Again not a lie. And interestingly your link doesn't even try to make a case that this is a lie.
Bush - "The Iraqi regime has violated all of those obligations. It possesses and produces chemical and biological weapons. "
Again not a lie and yet again no argument that it is. Instead the sire blaims the US for these weapons when if we did anything to contribute to Iraq getting these weapons it was marginal. Iraq would have them anyway with material it got from the USSR and Germany and other places. Besides even if we had given the Iraqis the chemical weapons all ready to use and gave them training in their use (and we did neither) that wouldn't make Bush's statement a lie. So much for your title "More Bush Lies"
Bush - "First, some ask why Iraq is different from other countries or regimes that also have terrible weapons. While there are many dangers in the world, the threat from Iraq stands alone -- because it gathers the most serious dangers of our age in one place.
Iraq's weapons of mass destruction are controlled by a murderous tyrant, who has already used chemical weapons to kill thousands of people. This same tyrant has tried to dominate the Middle East, has invaded and brutally occupied a small neighbor, has struck other nations without warning, and holds an unrelenting hostility towards the United States."
Again all true
Stephen Zunes, author of Tinderbox: U.S. Middle East Policy and the Roots of Terrorism and associate
professor of politics at the University of San Francisco: "The hostility toward the United States is a direct
consequence of U.S. hostility toward Iraq.
US hostility towards Iraq is a result of Iraq's actions and words. If Iraq had not invaded Kuwait was not trying to get nukes, and in general was acting and had acted in a peaceful friendly manner then Iraq never would have incured any US hostility. Also once again even if Zune's claim was true it would not make Bush's statement a lie. You set out to prove one thing then make an argument for another. This is one of the classic logical fallacies known as Irrelevant Conclusion.
datanation.com
Bush - "By its past and present actions, by its technological capabilities, by the merciless nature of its regime, Iraq is unique.
As a former chief weapons inspector for the U.N. has said, "The fundamental problem with Iraq remains the nature of the regime itself: Saddam Hussein is a homicidal dictator who is addicted to weapons of mass destruction."
Some ask how urgent this danger is to America and the world. The danger is already significant, and it only grows worse with time. If we know Saddam Hussein has dangerous weapons today -- and we do -- does it make any sense for the world to wait to confront him as he grows even stronger and develops even more dangerous weapons?
Again no lies.
And so on for the rest. I'll only list Bush's questionable statements from the rest, most of it is simple straight forward and honest and I'll just skip those points in the interest of controling the length of this post.
Bush - "These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We have learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb making, poisons, and deadly gases."
This may be a lie. More likely it is a mistake, but your link doesn't even show that much. It could indeed be true.
Bush - "He would be in a position to dominate the Middle East." (refering to Saddam if he had nuclear weapons)
This is questionable but not really a lie.
Bush - "Eight so-called presidential palaces were declared off-limits to unfettered inspections. These sites actually encompass 12 square miles, with hundreds of structures, both above and below the ground, where sensitive materials could be hidden. "
They were inspected but they were also "off-limits to unfettered inspections" The inspections were fettered most of all by great delay which allowed Iraq time to move things away from the inspectors. This statement is not really questionable but I list it because it is one of the few case where "www.accuracy.org/bush" actualy makes an argument that Bush lied rather then making an argument for something else while calling Bush a liar.
From the site that accuracy.org links to to support its claim that Bush is lying about the "presidential palces" - in other words from your source -
"The mission was not intended to be a search for prohibited material and none was found. In fact, there was very little equipment, documentation or other material in the sites at all. It was clearly apparent that all sites had undergone extensive evacuation. In all the sites outside of Baghdad, for example, there were no documents and no computers. The buildings were largely empty... "
fas.org |
