It was brought up and when it went no where, it was dropped.......that's why its authenticity is in question.
The comment really doesn't make any sense to me.
I'll draw an analogy to a sales effort. If was trying to sell you an Opteron system and pushed the idea that it can run 64 bit software, and then I noticed that you didn't seem to care about 64bit software so I started pushing its scalability, that doesn't mean that the claim that it can run 64bit software wasn't authentic.
Its possible that their concern for the Iraqi people was authentic but because that's an emotion or feeling rather than a fact like Opeteron can run 64 bit software, then their treatment of that issue helps determine its authenticity.
When the administration saw that concern about the Iraqi people was not getting the desired response and the American people were not on aboard for the war, they changed tactics and began suggesting that Saddam had WMD and was linked to al Qaeda. They went on to suggest that because of these circumstances, Saddam presented this country with considerable danger. That abrupt change of tactics showed that the administration was doing nothing more than trying to manipulate the Amer. public.......rotating issues until it found the one that did the trick.
And when it was determined that this issue was the one to work, we never heard any more about the poor Iraqi people during the lead up to the war. "The poor Iraqi" issue was not effective in getting the admin. what they wanted so they dropped it; thereby, robbing it of its authenticity.
That is, we didn't hear about the poor Iraqis again, until after the war when it became apparent that WMD were in short supply and the links to al Qaeda were suspect.
The behavior of Bush and his troops is not unlike a child who wants something. First, he/she pleads, then cries, then demands, then threatens etc. Bush's efforts are simply more sophisticated and adult like but essentially the same manipulative behavior.
ted |
