Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dalakhani
If we viewed the "case" to go to war with Iraq as courtroom, the Bush admin would be the prosecution and congress would be the jury. Now, if the jury was given false and misleading evidence, how can we blame them for coming to the wrong verdict? The part about the false and misleading evidence has been proven and now they want to turn the verdict. Unfortunately, its too late.
The spin on "why" we went to Iraq has changed so many times that its hard to keep it straight. First and foremost, we were supposedly going because Sadaam was a threat to American security with weapons of mass destruction. After it was shown that indeed that was false, it became a mission to lead the Iraqi people from the tyranny of Saddaam's regime and liberate them with police zones and no bid contracts. Now why are we there?
Only the blind would see any end in sight. This is a mess that will be around for years to come. And the world knows that we created it.
|
i read that congress knew exactly what the intelligence really was--it wasn't faulty, they were told the same things as the prez. but the members felt they were between a rock and a hard place--dems especially thought that a no vote on the war would cost them the elections in '02--so they voted for the war, so they wouldn't be viewed as being soft on terror. the cia is their fall guy.
if the cia lied, don't you think their would have been investigations that would make the iran contra hearings look like a pta meeting???
and as for wmd's...how did we have such a good idea that saddam had these weapons? because we provided a lot of them! remember the iran/iraq war? (for some reason for many years we based our entire foreign policy on the 'enemy of my enemy is friend' system. incredibly flawed system!! it gained us afganistan and iraq.) remember the gassing of the kurds? gas is a wmd....
all the truths behind all this may never come out. what about oil for food? what about kofi annan and his son? the u.n. mess? what about russia and france worrying more about $ than doing what's right?