SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: American Spirit who wrote (2454)12/11/2003 9:40:22 PM
From: Original Mad Dog  Read Replies (7) of 90947
 
Bushies definitely said Iraq was an imminent threat.

Bush himself said exactly the opposite in his State of the Union address:

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option.


whitehouse.gov

Bush took great pains to explain his view that the nature of such threats is such that we should not, as a matter of policy, wait until they become "imminent". You can, and apparently do, disagree with the logic and wisdom of that position. But don't keep lying and saying he said something (the threat was "imminent") when, in his most watched speech of the year, he said precisely the opposite.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext