| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) I don't have time to research it, but you are dead wrong on both counts. He called for Saddam to step down, and never used the term imminent threat. (...) Please, at this point nobody knows the "truth". For all we know, the WMDs could have (...) (21 years ago, 10-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) That's splitting hairs: "Grave and gathering" "Urgent". Bush is doing the Texas Two-Step. But on the other count, yes, Bush indicated that Saddam was to be removed from power - specifically because of the WoMD. Can't find any WoMD so now it's (...) (21 years ago, 10-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) I disagree in this sense: I believe what Bush meant was that, given time, the inevitable proliferation of WMDs to terrorists by SH was bound to occur, just not "imminently". If SH already had the weapons, then an attack could have happened at (...) (21 years ago, 10-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) As I said, splitting hairs. The indication was that Saddam had WoMD and was going to either use them himself or hand them out like candy to Islamic extremists (who would only to be happy to use them on Saddam, given half a chance). (...) He (...) (21 years ago, 10-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) I doubt it. After we back-stabbed him like that? He came to us and asked permission to invade Kuwait. We told him officially, and on the record, that we had no opinion on his minor border dispute. As soon as he committed we mobilized and (...) (21 years ago, 11-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) You'll have to quote me some source for that sequence of events - it sounds like the Official Saddam Version. And yes, even if that's the real undisputed sequence (which I'll bluntly say that I doubt), he'd still do it in a heartbeat. (...) (...) (21 years ago, 11-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) Well, okay. Bush believed SH possessed them and was fully willing and able to share them with his aquaintances at any time. Interesting question: Did SH know that he didn't have WMDs? Was he deceived by his own scientists? (...) Not so sure. A (...) (21 years ago, 11-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Renegade Republicans (was re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) G H W "I never met a spending bill I didn't like" Bush is the renegade Republican, my friend. USD 500B deficits as far as the eye can see, more government, more spending on social welfare programs, more intrusions into people's private lives, (...) (21 years ago, 11-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: Renegade Republicans (was re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) To be honest, so am I. The tax cut was good. The dissolution of the IRS would be terrific. But I think we are seeing the pitfalls of a guy who is known for compromising and getting along. But voting Democrat??? How in the world would you ever (...) (21 years ago, 11-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) That still only takes up back to the he's an incompetent or liar question, and saying the answer is incompetent still means he shouldn't be president. (...) What terrorists were going to destablize his neighbors? They would have gone for Iraq (...) (21 years ago, 11-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
|
| | Re: To change the tune...
|
|
(...) You may think he's a liar, but I don't, so on that issue we may have to agree to disagree. Now as far as incompetency goes, I say this. Bush could only make a decision based on the "facts" given to him. But given SH's history, and the (...) (21 years ago, 11-Feb-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|