Posted on 03/25/2007 8:48:28 AM PDT by Fennie
bump
"The lie of no WMDs has been repeated so many times that it is now perceived as fact."
Yet, when you ask a liberal WHERE the truckloads of "WMD's", that SURELY would have been "found" immediately after the invasion,(if Bush had actually lied), all you get is a blank stare, followed by a confused look, then a tirade of hate-filled curse words directed at you...
Amen Brother!
Swahahahaha, have you read your copy yet?
Whether or not you say he should, fact is he does, all the time. As I understood it, you're trying to explain why (if indeed WMDs were secreted out) the administration doesn't defend themselves against the lied-about-WMDs charge. Well, any such explanation of Bush's behavior in that regard would have to include an explanation of why Bush not only doesn't defend himself but constantly "admits we were wrong about WMDs". See?
I see your point, that is indeed most likely what he was referring to.
Russia, whom we need to help with North Korea and also to keep pumping oil into the market. Plus, it is not goof to poke the Bear. Better to let them we know privately, and see what get accomplished back channel. Once everything is public knowledge, the Russianas are forced to deny and perhaps take steps which would be dangerous.
I have my doubts as to whether these reasons really justify the PR and national-honor hit Bush, and the nation, has taken since 2003. That is not to say you are wrong. For all I know, maybe it is indeed true that 1. there were WMDs, 2. Russia had a hand in moving them, 3. the administration knows this, but 4. is pretending not to publicly, because 5. they don't want to "risk a confrontation with Russia".
What I'm saying is that if that's all the case, I have my doubts as to the wisdom of the prioritization which fears the supposed "confrontation with Russia" that (supposedly) would have resulted from clarifying what happened to the WMDs (which by assumption in this discussion were moved), more than it fears the damage that has actually been done by letting lied-about-WMDs become conventional wisdom, which has caused our national honor to be horribly damaged, and the public's war-fighting morale utterly sapped.
This deference to security displays an adult reason for not revealing too much which has resulted in the idiot brat democrats exploiting the administration's silence because they (the childish tantrum democrats) care not a whit about security in their lust to empower themselves by destroying the administration. Bush's silence is motivated by much larger concerns than the democrap lies and roll on the floor tantrums.
Finally, consider this: the information is trickling out via back channels like releasing tons of supposedly untranslated documents, some of which our own JVeritas has graciously made available (via translation) to FR. Individuals are coming forward in a trickle to tell a different story than the democraps and their media whoredom blare constantly at the dumbed down public.
So they're still there, and we know exactly where, and we've baby-sat them carefully from afar these 4 years, but don't want to tip that hand, and we're gonna keep doing that indefinitely?
I'm not buying it. If we had that capability, we'd never have lost track of their location(s) in Iraq in the first place.
This deference to security displays an adult reason for not revealing too much
Perhaps, if I believed your explanation, but I do not.
which has resulted in the idiot brat democrats exploiting the administration's silence because they (the childish tantrum democrats) care not a whit about security in their lust to empower themselves by destroying the administration.
No argument there :)
Bush's silence is motivated by much larger concerns than the democrap lies and roll on the floor tantrums.
I'd like to believe your explanation is true. I doubt it is.
Individuals are coming forward in a trickle to tell a different story than the democraps and their media whoredom blare constantly at the dumbed down public.
One thing I definitely believe, and do not dispute, is that the real story is not what the "lied about WMDs" Democrats say it is. However, that doesn't mean that the explanation being offered here is the correct one. Best,
My reason for offering the alternate explanation was not to convince you but to expand your thinking. I shall not respond further to the baiting which follows these threads. You're smart enough to apply that which makes sense and reject that which has no use in your agenda, such that it may be.
And now that they are in Syria, we have tons of humint on the ground keeping track of them?
See, I thought part of your argument was that we aren't saying anything because we don't want to tip our hand, for the reason that somehow we believe they're (relatively) secure where they are now and we wouldn't want them moved to baddies. I am specifically disputing the notion that they are "secure" where they are now in any real sense, or that we can be sure they haven't been/aren't being moved to baddieas already. (This all ssumes that they were indeed moved to Bekaa in the first place, of course.) In other words, I am disputing that the rationale we supposedly have for not wanting to say anything is actually operative.
My reason for offering the alternate explanation was not to convince you but to expand your thinking.
Ok. And, thank you. I appreciate these theories. Again, I wish an explanation like yours were the truth, but I doubt that it is.
I shall not respond further to the baiting which follows these threads.
"baiting"?
Look, feel free not to respond if you wish, but I don't get where I was "baiting". This is a discussion board for commenting on news items. That's what I did and that's what I continue to do. Let the record show that you responded to me first. So, I responded back. It's totally ok for you not to respond to my comments further after that but this accusation of "baiting" just makes no sense.
... 'what follows these threads' ... relax, I wasn't accusing you of baiting; we have had a worthwhile exchange that I do not wish to further engage. Thanks.
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.