Rockefeller's statement is an obvious trap, and it is sad that so few of your recognize it as such. For Rockefeller to have done anything wrong, his statement about Bush planning early to invade Iraq would have to have been true. If not true, then Rockefeller did nothing wrong, but only stupid and unpatriotic.
By attacking Rockefeller's, you folks are inadvertently calling Bush a liar.
Anyone ready to WAKE THE HELL UP?
IMO, the President should have been planning early to invade Iraq.
<<<<
For Rockefeller to have done anything wrong, his statement about Bush planning early to invade Iraq would have to have been true. If not true, then Rockefeller did nothing wrong, but only stupid and unpatriotic.
By attacking Rockefeller's, you folks are inadvertently calling Bush a liar.
>>>>
I don't see that at all. Any President worth his salt WOULD PLAN FOR WAR IN ANY CASE. Do you think we do not have a plan to go to war with Iran or North Korea IN EXISTENCE NOW ? I highly doubt it and I am THANKFUL that such plans exist.
In other words, it would be irresponsible for Bush not to PRE-EMPTIVELY plan for war IN CASE WMDs WERE INDEED FOUND and there was a smoking gun.
Rockefeller is READING IN to Bush's plans and concluding that HE WANTS TO GO TO WAR SO BADLY THAT HE WILL IGNORE ALL EVIDENCE OF COOPERATION ( which of course we know to be non-existent ). Had there been evidence of cooperation, there would be no need to go to war ( BUT THE WAR PLAN WOULD STILL BE IN PLACE ).
Bush DOES NOT TRUST SADDAM ( and neither did Clinton ), nr should we blame them for their distrust. He had 12 years to comply and countless resolutions and he simply thumbed his nose at them, kicked the inspectors out and then started to BRIBE the very sherrifs ( the UN ) who were supposed to make sure he complied with the resolutions.
Therefore, given 911, given the fact that an Iraqi agent was involved in the first WTC attacks, I see no reason why a responsible president SHOULD NOT PLAN AHEAD for war.
That this plan was leaked to Syria is inexcusable.
" By attacking Rockefeller's, you folks are inadvertently calling Bush a liar."
Not really, Rockefeller couched everything in terms of "in my opinion Bush has already made up his mind" therefore whether or not Bush actually had made up his mind is moot. Rockefeller (in my opinion) shared classified intelligence with people he shouldn't have. He should be kicked out of the senate at the very least.
Good point and true.
However, he admitted on TV that he goes to foreign nations and presents himself as one with access to intel and shares that intel with other nations as if true.
We have to do something about him.
Another thing.
Of course the President would quickly have determined that Saddam had to be removed after 9/11. When you have foreign attacks on American soil that kill 3,000. You quickly realize that nuclear capability in those same hands would kill 100,000's. And you then look to where the nuclear dangers are.
If Bush had not taken action against a powder keg like Saddam, these Democrats would be calling for impeachment as soon as any attack hit us.
So, Bush would have been in this position either way.
He had the SAME intelligence as Pres Bush. HE dessiminated that info to Syria. Who are NOW training the terrorists, and the reports of truckloads of "stuff" going into syria from Iraq is a DIRECT result of his treason.
"For Rockefeller to have done anything wrong, his statement about Bush planning early to invade Iraq would have to have been true. If not true, then Rockefeller did nothing wrong, but only stupid and unpatriotic."
Not in my opinion. Communicating a statement of intent to a foreign country, particularly a sponsor of terrorism, while not serving in an official diplomatic capacity, is wrong in and of itself.
Further, assuming that any 1998-era intel was correct in stating that Iraq had active WMD programs, any reasonable person knowledgable of Saddam's thinking would realize that the reaction to these statements would be the active attempt to obfuscate discovery, hide materials and programs, and disperse these materials and programs so that after any theoretical American action the programs could be resumed.
As such his statements reasonably would be expected to have an effect deleterious to standing American policy regarding Iraq (and not 'merely' harmful to W or Republicans), and so are wrong whether or not the statements were based on any actual knowledge or were fabricated.
Rockefellors statement is wrong whether Bush was planning to invade Iraq or not. He is not the President nor a spokesperson for the administration. Having coached our enemies he certainly was irresponsible.