All W needs to say on IRAQ :(vanity explanation)

8 feb2004 | Finalapproach29er

[Finalapproach29er]

W did not close the sale today. Here is what he needs to say to win this arguement resoundingly:

1-"Saddam was going to be taken out during my term. Not only was he helping terrorists, the 12 years of sanctions were turing the Arab world against us."

2-"Because of 9/11, and the believe in WMD'S, I moved up the timetable a year or two. I didn't want to give more time to a man who has a grudge against the US to plot against us."

3-"While I still believe WMD's exist, people should know war was enevitable. Giving the Hussien regime more time to prepare for the enevitable conflict makes no sense."

4-"Finally, not yet finding WMD's doesn't prove they don't exist. To the contrary, some of the naysayers can't prove they don't exist."

5-"If people want another reason besides WMD's, how about a hostile (IRAQ)nation w/$20 BILLION in oil revenue to help fund terrorists. We won't defeat terrorists until the Muslim oil states are friendly to the US. We don't need their oil,we just need them to forsake helping terrorists."

6- If we don't now help these Arabs into the modern world, in 15 years, when the world is running on hydrogen, it will be the Jetsons vs. the (angry)Flintstones with nuclear weapons.

[Finalapproach29er]

Isn't this all that needs to be said?

[kingu]

If Bush had said all you had there, he would have been impeached for not following accepted politically correct dialog.

Just get over it. The RATs don't care what Bush's explanations are about anything. It doesn't matter that Bill Clinton did not seek the permission of the UN or the French to go into Kosovo. It doesn't matter if every President since Reagan has said that Saddam had WMDs, it does not matter if the Iraqi army distributed chemical weapon countermeasures to protect their troops at the start of the war -- nothing matters because Bush is a Republican who dares use the word God.

Just move on.. Nothing to see here.

[Finalapproach29er]

I think we need to win this argument. W looks defensive & did not smile yesterday. He should be laughing out loud at these clowns.

Voters want cheerfulness & confidence.
Kerry needs to be put on the defensive right now.

[Torie]

Nope. The best explanation is that everybody thought Saddam had WMD, the British, the French, the Germans, and the Russians. Heck, maybe even Saddam thought he had them. The issue was how best to get him to give them up. The issue was whether to leave the US sitting in the sand indefinitely, while Blix flounced around, which was not an option. That combined with our other concerns about Saddam, as a force for conflict in the middle east, for his harboring of terrorists, and for just plain humanitarian reasons, was a more than adequate basis for taking him down.

[hocndoc]

He could say that our intelligence community and that of other countries believed what Saddam believed. We believed what his own people were telling him, for pity's sake!

[lizma]

nothing matters because Bush is a Republican who dares use the word God

He said his hero was Jesus Christ and the left will always hate him for that.

But... I would like to see the RNC run pre-election commercials with our service men and women talking about Bush. Watched Ollie North on Armstrong William's show tonight. Ollie said that our service men actually got tears in their eyes when Bush showed up for their Thanksgiving. I think America needs to know how our military feels about our Commander in Chief. The soccer moms would love it.

[woofie]

I think the argument is this:

Realists see the world as dangerous
The premis of the President and his advisers is that bad people need to be stopped


The premis of the left is that bad people will be nice if we are nice....theirs is a utopian vision which is based in delusion....

Bush has articulated this but needs to ask this of the left:

Prove to us that we and the world are safe if we continue to do what we did under Clinton.

[kingu]

He should be laughing out loud at these clowns.

I'd like to see the focus group that says that seeing their president laugh at the news media will make them more likely to vote for a person they don't already like.

The press will write that Bush was cautious and defensive in his interview. Had he laughed at them, he would have been belligerent and arrogant in the face of contested facts. Which to your mind would make you more comfortable with a sitting president?

Bush did not go on Meet the Press to win any DUer's vote. He went there to show that he wasn't afraid of facing the questions, and he pulled it off to my satisfaction. I would have rather liked different questions; such as about this guest worker program, why he didn't mention the Mars mission in his State of the Union address.

It was also a screen test for the upcoming debates between whomever the RATs put up as their sacrificial victim of 'voting fraud and conspiracies by the right wing to steal the White House again.'

[Finalapproach29er]

Will they believe W the "next time" if he admits everybody was wrong this time? Risky.

Americans can be fickle; they don't like being embarrassed. GWB could be dumped if he uses this tactic, even if its not his fault.

That's why he should explain,IMO.

[Finalapproach29er]

Pretty good.

[Frank_2001]

Absolutely! W can win all arguments but he's been slipping in the polls... many people are obviously sucking up that Rat drivel, IMHO the GOP needs to just assume now that Kerry will be the nominee and President Bush needs to get out there and campaign with the cheerfulness and confidence you correctly say the voters want!

[kingu]

But... I would like to see the RNC run pre-election commercials with our service men and women talking about Bush. Watched Ollie North on Armstrong William's show tonight. Ollie said that our service men actually got tears in their eyes when Bush showed up for their Thanksgiving. I think America needs to know how our military feels about our Commander in Chief. The soccer moms would love it.

The RATs like to pretend that Iraq is a quagmire and is just like Vietnam. They'll use anything they can to continue to try to associate Vietnam with the war in Iraq. Why is Bush's record in Alabama an issue? Because they believe he went AWOL? No, it is so that they can continue to connect Vietnam to Iraq and to Bush.

RNC commercials showing service men and women who are well pleased with their Commander in Chief would be turned around by the DNC as someone parading around the innocent victims of our aggressive foreign policy and proof that our service men and women have been brainwashed by the system. The DNC would cream their pants at the idea of such commercials.

Iraqi elections happen this summer, and camera crews will be all over the country there to find some sign of fraud; someone to claim through an interpretor (but with the original audio cut to prevent any correct interpretation) that they felt their vote didn't count, or that there was wide-spread cheating.

And those same camera crews will be dispatched around the United States in November to document claims of fraud here, because the supporters of the DNC in the media know that no matter who is nominated, they can't break the Electoral college - Bush has the election sewn up already. They have to do whatever they can to make this second election seem illegitimate.

[lizma]

maybe even Saddam thought he had them. The issue was how best to get him to give them up.

Does he even know where they are?? They have a habit of killing anyone "in the know". Uday and Qusay might have been in charge of hiding them and Saddam knows nothing.

As far as WMD it makes no sense that a tyrant would just plain give them up. To think so is just an ignorant leap of faith I'm not willing to make.

[Finalapproach29er]

What if GWB has to act against someone else? They won't believe its true, or the information he gets is bogus.

That's why we have to explain that the war was enevitable and that the WMD issue only moved up the timetable. IMO

[hocndoc]

I don't think the President should say that nothing was wrong this time, I was giving another explanation. I think it's significant that Saddam's own people and Saddam believed that they had or soon could have WMD.

BTW, even Mr. Kay didn't give any evidence to prove there are no WMD's.

[Finalapproach29er]

I don't like the overconfidence. I saw Kerry whip Weld in debates. He can think (BS) on his feet. He can shovel it the way Clinton used to. It worked for Clinton.

We mustn't take the ugly man lightly.

[lizma]

No, it is so that they can continue to connect Vietnam to Iraq and to Bush.

I know they will try but I don't think (I hope, I pray) it won't work. We didn't have a 9/11 before Vietnam. We didn't have a volunteer army for Vietnam.

[Finalapproach29er]

Maybe Syria could be persuaded to give up Iraq's WMD'S, if they thought Bush might attack them.

Time to threaten Syria privately?

[EQAndyBuzz]

It's not time to threaten Syria. It is time to convince Syria that the US has more to offer in terms of butter and not guns.

I see Syria giving up the weapons when Israel gives up the Golan Heights. To me that is the deal on the table. And ISrael is not happy about it. They built the wall very quickly. Something bigger is in play here.

Ask this question. Who do the Israeli's want in office in 2004?

[hocndoc]

I'll leave that up to the experts. (I have opinions, not expertise in this stuff)(and I know it)