Subject:
|
Re: Revisionists...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 18 Jun 2003 14:25:21 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
207 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Richard Marchetti wrote:
| |
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Costello wrote:
| |
Now Bush rubs the Dem’s the wrong way...
|
There’s an infinity of difference between lying about Oval Office Oral and
the creation of a war and lying about the basis of that war. Frankly, I
think it’s sickening that you can’t see a difference.
|
If you could take your confrontational partisan hat for just a second and
re-read my last post you would see that I was actually criticising Republicans
in congress who are currently playing politics as usual, by blocking attempts at
an investigation. I merely used Clinton because he was our last Democratic
leader and when in office the Democrats danced the same dance. Either way I
always find it frustrating when partisism takes precidence over what is good and
right.
| |
On the one hand, a manipulative woman got her hands into the president’s
trousers. On the other hand, many young americans and many more Iraqis died.
Yeah. those things are prefectly equal in magnitude -- NOT!!!
|
Look the situation is over so you can drop the DNC sound bytes. It should be
common knowledge that Clinton was persued and impeached for felonious perjury,
not his sexual indiscressions.
| |
| |
I agree that there should be a full investigation needs to be launched, and
care needs to be given to the sensitivity of classified information.
|
Why? If the war is over and all of our information was bogus, what is there
left to hide except the lies?
| |
Ultimately the question that needs to be answered is if people are going to
die, based on intelligence reports how do we ensure that those reports are
100% accurate?
|
Maybe they shouldn’t die on information alone -- maybe we need to wait until
the circumstances are obvious and the evidence bona fide.
|
Are you advocating that we should have just sat on our hands and waited until we
were in fact attacked? Isn’t that what people are criticising Bush for
concerning 9/11. On one hand we should have acted preemptively to stop the
Al-Quaida attack, but then we should wait until Iraq attacks.
| |
There’s a due diligence factor in play here -- and Shrub simply did not take
every reasonable precaution to confirm the evidence upon which he based his
call to war. He rushed to judgement and forced everyone along with him with
boldfaced lies.
As you said, the buck stops in the oval office.
Due diligence.
|
I definately agree that the buck stops with Bush, and it should. However I
cannot see how his actions were a rush, the intelligence that Bush used has been
around for a while. It was the basis for Clintons 98 attack (without consulting
congress or the UN), it was the basis for resolution 1441 and was generally
agreed upon by most leaders, including France. Sadam refuted what the
intelligence said and Blix was sent to verify. Upon the completion of his
investigation (no he wasn’t finished looking, but the alloted time was up) he
determined that Iraq wasn’t completely honest and compliant.
Now that the intelligence is in question, aren’t the UN and Blix’s actions in
question also? The whole economic embargo was based on this intelligence. Was
this intelligence bad? We don’t know yet, but if it was, more heads than just
Bush’es should roll. And if it is good, should we hold Chirac to the same
standard?
Scott C.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Revisionists...
|
| (...) That whole line of questioning was really impermissable and would not have happened at another time in history. You are talking about a man that lied about having an affair. Why? Because supposedly you can't be president if you inhale or like (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
| | | The Lie (was Re: Revisionists...)
|
| (...) I don't think I was harsh enough last time I responded to this -- the fact is that the above statement is a flat-out falsehood. I won't suggest that you are knowingly lying, but you are at least following bad political information from some (...) (21 years ago, 18-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Revisionists...
|
| (...) There's an infinity of difference between lying about Oval Office Oral and the creation of a war and lying about the basis of that war. Frankly, I think it's sickening that you can't see a difference. On the one hand, a manipulative woman got (...) (21 years ago, 17-Jun-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
