Posted on 03/19/2013 6:11:37 PM PDT by DeprogramLiberalism
The following is an excerpt from an essay from the Nuclear Counterarguments Essay Series. It is the definitive counterargument to those who feel the invasion of Iraq was based on deliberate deceptions manufactured by the Bush administration. Anyone who perseveres through to the end of its equivalent of 43 X 300-word pages will never again doubt the sincerity of President Bush's decision to invade Iraq. The essay series is written to liberals in the first person, but it is also for conservatives.
Perhaps no other issue heats a liberal’s pot up to boil more than the Iraq War. “Bush lied – thousands died!” That has been the liberal groupthink mantra. No matter how successful the war has ultimately turned out, no liberal will ever accept that it has been worth the blood, money and loss of reputation to America – at least until they read this essay. I realize, American neighbor, that you have been led to believe that the Bush administration lied about the prewar intelligence to encourage the American public’s support for the invasion of Iraq. The orthodox media, Democrat politicians and the liberal blogosphere have hammered home this assertion for years. But what evidence have they ever presented that supports their case? Simply repeating the same assertions over and over is not evidence. [c5jkk] [1] Get this, American neighbor: It is a simple fact that the conclusions of multiple bipartisan government oversight reports, as well as considerable other evidence does not support the liberal groupthink mantra. The rationalization behind the derogatory “Bush lied – thousands died!” is just another liberalism. Now we will clear up this issue once and for all – welcome to the lonely funeral of the liberal mantra, “Bush lied – thousands died!” More here.
(Excerpt) Read more at deprogrammingliberalism.com ...
It won’t stop liberals from repeating the mantra. They care not at all for the facts. It’s all about promoting their failed ideology over everything else.
I have a strategy and tactics in the essays for dealing with liberals.
The fact is that the Iraq War basically caused this extreme leftward lurch going on in this country right now.
Spit on Bush and his Iraq War.
Perhaps you should read the essay before making that judgment on this thread. You’ll look less like an ideologue.
I believe Iraq fired the first shots at the US in 1987.
Google USS STARK.
http://www.navybook.com/no-higher-honor/timeline/uss-stark-on-fire/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Stark_%28FFG-31%29
I hate to admit it (as a supporter of the Iraq invasion), but I've also felt the whole thing contributed greatly to the GOP loss of Congress in 2006 and Obama's victory in 2008.
Frankly, I've always been pissed they found no WMD in Iraq. I'm still convinced that Saddam had WMD, and that they were all shipped to Syria; but the fact that GWB allowed the WMD to escape while doing that prolonged PC dance at the United Nations, is inexcusable. The WMD were, after all, *the* primary justification he used for the invasion.
Oh yeah - I had forgotten about that.
If you read the essay you will find out that there is much evidence to suggest that many of the WMD are still in Iraq.
Thanks DeprogramLiberalism.
So what? Precious little good that does us now. No WMD were found by GWB, and he had 5 years to do it. So GWB was discredited, as was the GOP that supported him. All of which contributed, IMO, to our losing the Congress in 2006 and the WH in 2008.
Furthermore, you cite "evidence to suggest." Evidence does not suggest; evidence proves. What you have in the essay is speculation.
You’re welcome.
The real issue was never a matter of whether Saddam had WMD, but that he would have again begun producing them and then providing them to terrorists after the sanctions were lifted. You really shoud read the essay. I am sure you will be greatly surprised at the many things you don’t know.
Liberals are mentally deseased.
We KNOW Saddam had WMD- HE USED THEM ON HIS OWN PEOPLE!!!!! THERE ARE PHOTOS!!!!!
LMAO!!! Do you recall all the time dithered away at the U.N., making the case for the Iraq invasion? Colin Powell's PowerPoint presentations? The satellite photos of convoys leaving Iraq for Syria, presumably transporting WMD out of the country? It was *all* about Saddam's possessing WMD. Present tense.
Are you seriously claiming that the GWB administration was trying to garner international support for the Iraq invasion on the basis of "Saddam might maybe someday in the future develop WMD for terrorists after the sanctions are lifted"? If so, your memory is clearly faulty.
kevao: All of which contributed, IMO, to our losing the Congress in 2006 and the WH in 2008.
Yep to both of you. And that loss of the WH might turn out to be permanent. It is one thing to argue over whether Bush II should have invaded Iraq: Did Saddam really have significant WMD's targeted against the West, or was he just posturing to scare his mortal enemy, Iran?
But beyond that, Bush needed to win the war QUICKLY and CLEANLY. He did neither. Everything about the occupation was bungled, including the disastrous appointment of that idiot Paul Bremer.
Of course I remember that the media and liberals made a huge political issue out of Saddam having MDs. But again, the real problem behind the scenes was not whether he had them. It was whether, even if he didn’t have any at the time, would he get the opportunity to make them again. And the answer to that question was definitely yes. There was a very widespread and stromng movement to have the sanctions against Iraq lifted that would have allowed Saddam carte blanch to again manufacture tham and then distribute as he pleased.
Bumped to read later.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.