Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: quebecois
Actually that Vanity Fair article has shown to be a misrepresentation of a misrepresentation.

WMD was the cause that everyone could agree on, but last time I saw the news during the pre-war standoff, there were a host of other issues continuously raised: links to terrorism, general threat to regional stability, oppressive regime that contributes to general terrorist "swamp."

So no, I don't think we can agree on that particular issue.

Rarely do nations go to war over just one issue, nor did Powell, Blair or Bush simply name one. They simply hammered away on one more when it came to the UN. It is the media that is hyping the WMD issue the most, because they have to latch on to SOMEthing.
42 posted on 06/01/2003 4:42:38 PM PDT by Skywalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies ]


To: Skywalk; quebecois
"...but last time I saw the news during the pre-war standoff, there were a host of other issues continuously raised: links to terrorism, general threat to regional stability, oppressive regime that contributes to general terrorist "swamp." Rarely do nations go to war over just one issue, nor did Powell, Blair or Bush simply name one." ~ Skywalk

The Boob-bait for the bubbas spin:

"Wolfowitz says Saudi troop withdrawal was 'huge' reason for war with Iraq"

The *complete* Wolfowitz quote from the transcript:

Q: Was that one of the arguments that was raised early on by you and others that Iraq actually does connect, not to connect the dots too much, but the relationship between Saudi Arabia, our troops being there, and bin Laden's rage about that, which he's built on so many years, also connects the World Trade Center attacks, that there's a logic of motive or something like that? Or does that read too much into --

Wolfowitz: No, I think it happens to be correct. The truth is that for reasons that have a lot to do with the U.S. government bureaucracy we settled on the one issue that everyone could agree on which was weapons of mass destruction as the core reason, but -- hold on one second --

Kellems: Sam there may be some value in clarity on the point that it may take years to get post-Saddam Iraq right. It can be easily misconstrued, especially when it comes to --

Wolfowitz: -- "there have always been three fundamental concerns. One is weapons of mass destruction, the second is support for terrorism, the third is the criminal treatment of the Iraqi people. Actually I guess you could say there's a fourth overriding one which is the connection between the first two. Sorry, hold on again."

47 posted on 06/01/2003 5:22:19 PM PDT by Matchett-PI (Marxist DemocRATS, Nader-Greens, and Religious Zealots = a clear and present danger to our Freedoms.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson