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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Neeka who wrote (436794)7/31/2003 6:01:48 PM
From: Kevin Rose  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 769667
 
I was also completely, 100% sure that there were WMDs in Iraq (and posted as much here).

However, if there existence cannot be proven, then that does not prove that I'm a liar any more than those you mention here. What it means is that we may have been duped, intentionally or unintentionally, into believing that the WMDs existed.

What will you (and other Bush supporters) say if no WMDs are found? If no credible evidence of an immediate threat to the US is found?

I've said all along here that the hunt for WMDs is CRITICAL, for Bush's and the US's credibility. In recent weeks, Bush supporters have downplayed that importance, possibly hedging their bets, by pointing out what a murderous despot Saddam is. Removing despots in itself is neither the reason we were given for war, nor the historical aim of the US (else we would have be in Cambodia, China, Indonesia, Rwanda, North Korea, Somalia, etc).

However, there seems to be good news on this front, as the arms inspector (Kelly? He was just on tv) is very optimistic about finding solid evidence. We need to soon, to restore some credibility to this occupation.



To: Neeka who wrote (436794)7/31/2003 9:56:32 PM
From: Raymond Duray  Respond to of 769667
 
Re: If Bush lied they ALL lied.

Seems that way. But only Bush started an illegal war. The rest were just expressing delusional thinking, political posturing or ineptitude.

Bush cannot be considered to have been inept in starting the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

He can only be considered criminal.



To: Neeka who wrote (436794)7/31/2003 10:06:15 PM
From: laura_bush  Read Replies (5) | Respond to of 769667
 
Hey, Big Mo:

Regardless of what you think, your shitty inferences calculated to minimize other posters' integrity suck big time.

Yes, for "god's sake," you're a true blue Republican.

Who gives a crap?

How 'bout losing that "habit?"

It makes you look really stupid.

Can you do it?

lb