Ford had problems with Bush Iraq policy

AP via Yahoo ^ | December 28, 2006 | NA

[traderrob6]

Related.....

http://exposingtheleft.blogspot.com/2006/12/debunking-woodward.html

[oldbill]

Can't wait for Woodward's next interview with Ford.
He has a history of interviewing dead or comatose people.

[RightWhale]

Your opinion is noted. Also your ad hominem, which doesn't pertain to the issue.

[samtheman]

Your idea is the stuff of Moronism.

If we want out, we don't need the dead words of a dead lame-brain liberal Republican. We have plenty of lame-brains, plenty of liberals, and plenty of idiot liberal republicans around.

You really think you're on to something with this brain storm of yours, that somehow Ford's opinion can be the cover for a retreat, but NEWS FLASH: your idea is moronic.

[ARealMothersSonForever]

"Ford was a few weeks shy of his 93rd birthday as we chatted for about 45 minutes. He'd been visited by President Bush three weeks earlier and said he'd told Bush he supported the war in Iraq but that the 43rd President had erred by staking the invasion on weapons of mass destruction."

There is the money quote. Yet we shall see endless criticizm of President Ford. The first one to call him a "traitor" wins a toaster, and legendary status.

[rhombus]

Following Johnson's conduct of the Vietnam war, Congress exerted itself and severely weakened the Presidency. Nixon's Watergate conduct further encouraged a stronger Congress and a weakened Presidency. Ford and Carter were extremely weak Presidents which suited Congress just fine.

[RightWhale]

So, what is your idea, besides ignoring the Ford opinion AS IF IT DIDN'T HAPPEN, and handing it over as a Christmas present to Murtha, Pelosi, etc.?

[Stultis]

Woodward wrote in the Post that his interview took place for a future book project

Oh, brother. Another Woodward book. Well, let's see, he's written one essentially saying the Iraq war was brilliantly handled, followed by one claiming it was incompetently handled. So what's left for book number three? Woodward flip-flops as bad as John Kerry, and is even more likely to attribute key claims to unidentified or unconfirmable sources.

[samtheman]

Right. Ad hominem. Well, here's some ad hominem for you:

You are a Bush Basher trying to masquerade as an objective observer, breathing wise counsel and sounding erudite and coming up with this oh-so-delicious idea of using The Wise Late President's words in a way that will be to ALL our benefit.

Cut the crap, man. Bash the war outright. Bash Bush out in the open. Don't try to pretend not to so while doing so. It's unseemly.

[samtheman]

My idea.

How about this: IGNORE IT.

It's another faulty piece of advice in a sea of faulty advice.

Just because the guy had an R after his name, means NOTHING.

Ford famously said, "I'm a Ford, not a Lincoln," but on this subject, he sounds like a Chaffee to me.

[samtheman]

Ford and Carter were extremely weak Presidents which suited Congress just fine.

Yup.

[Dixie Yooper]

I'm sure there are more than a few dead South Vietnamese waiting in line to have a word with Ford about how he handled North Vietnam after they broke our agreement about staying north of the DMZ after we left.

[Moose4]

"Rumsfeld and Cheney and the president made a big mistake in justifying going into the war in Iraq. They put the emphasis on weapons of mass destruction," Ford said. "And now, I've never publicly said I thought they made a mistake, but I felt very strongly it was an error in how they should justify what they were going to do."

Key words bolded.

It seems to me that President Ford did not oppose the war in Iraq, as much as he opposed the reasoning behind it that was presented to the American people. It looks like his words are being twisted.

}:-)4

[RightWhale]

You're wrong. Do not talk to me anymore.

[Paradox]

" Saddam Hussein was an evil person and there was justification to get rid of him," he observed to the Daily News. "But we shouldn't have put the basis on weapons of destruction. That was a bad mistake. Where does (Bush) get his advice?"

Whats wrong with this? I could come to agree with it myself. Ford isn't saying it was wrong to invade, but that too much emphasis was placed on the WMD. You know what? In retrospect, he might be right, and I could, as a good conservative, potentially agree.

So much knee jerking going around these days, FR needs an in house orthopedist..

[samtheman]

I'm wrong about which thing?

That Ford was a weak president?

That Ford was a liberal republican?

That there's no way to "use" this without doing what the Left wants: retreat from Iraq?

That you are actually a Bush-basher who's trying to pretend to be "objective"?

All of the above?

None of the above?

[ohioWfan]

So, Son.........now you are joining with Bob Woodward and using him as a weapon to attack our mission in Iraq.

Tell me how you sleep at night.

[AnotherUnixGeek]

" Saddam Hussein was an evil person and there was justification to get rid of him," he observed to the Daily News. "But we shouldn't have put the basis on weapons of destruction. That was a bad mistake.

This much I do agree with. There was and is excellent justification to take out Saddam and form a friendly democracy in Iraq outside of the WMD issue:

1) To get rid of a mass-murdering dictator and prevent the death and torture of thousands of Iraqis.

2) To create a stable, democratic ally in the Mideast besides Israel.

3) To remove Saddam's threat to Saudi Arabia, thereby allowing us to remove US troops from the nation of Mecca and Medina and defanging one of al-Qaeda's propaganda points about the US.

4) To serve as a catalyst for democratic change in the surrounding Muslim tyrannies. This actually seemed to be happening in the period after the invasion, with Lebanon's Cedar Revolution and student protests in Iran.

5) To give our long-suffering Kurdish allies, betrayed repeatedly by "realists" such as Kissinger and Baker, some relief and autonomy.

The WMD threat, based on the best available intelligence at the time, was one excellent reason to depose Saddam, but it was not the only one. I was surprised at the time that the Administration and State Dept. put such emphasis on the WMD issue and didn't highlight the other solid reasons to invade Iraq - reasons that I think should have appealed to the more rational members of the Left. I respect and applaud Bush entirely for his decision to invade - but it's a pity he didn't spend plenty of time both before and after the invasion making sure everyone heard why there were so many good reasons to do so.

[marmar]

I am a girl and I used to be a weapons troop, I loaded B1s, A10s and F16s. I got out of AD and joined the Reserves and became a medic. It is the most fulfilling job I have ever done. Being in the Aerovac chain bringing the wounded home. Thank you for your service and for standing up for our country. Load Toad

[pissant]

Who gives a sh*t what Ford said about anything.