Bush, Blair Say Iraq War Is Not Cause of Attacks

Bush, Blair Say Iraq War Is Not Cause of Attacks
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A1827-2003Nov20.html
By Dana Milbank and Glenn Frankel
Washington Post Staff Writers
Friday, November 21, 2003; Page A01

LONDON, Nov. 20 -- President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair declared Thursday that the invasion of Iraq was not to blame for the recent wave of terrorist violence and that the bombs that devastated two British facilities in Turkey proved the need to press ahead with the military campaign.

"Our mission in Iraq is noble and it is necessary, and no act of thugs or killers will change our resolve or alter their fate," Bush said at a joint news conference with Blair, as tens of thousands of demonstrators gathered on the city's streets to protest the Iraq war. "We will finish the job we have begun."

---snip---

Blair echoed Bush's remarks, calling for attacking terrorists "wherever and whenever we can."

Bush raised the possibility of increasing the number of U.S. troops in Iraq. When a reporter mentioned the United States' announced plans to reduce troop levels, the president responded: "We could have less troops in Iraq, we could have the same number of troops in Iraq, we could have more troops in Iraq -- whatever is necessary to secure Iraq."

A top aide to Bush, who briefed reporters after the news conference on condition that she not be identified, said that Bush was not announcing a change in policy and that expectations remained that troop levels would be reduced. "There is simply nothing to suggest that the number of American forces would need to increase," the official said. "In fact, the conversations with the commanders have gone the other way."

----snip----> Clinton-fault-alert <----

Britain's foreign secretary, Jack Straw, responded earlier Thursday to critics who have questioned the effectiveness of the war in Iraq, saying he believed it had diminished the threat of terrorism. He also was critical of Bush's predecessor. "What people have got to remember is that September 11th happened in 2001 and not in 2003," Straw said. "It was planned under the presidency of Bill Clinton."

-----snip----

Bush, who struck a defiant tone throughout the news conference, produced what appeared to be glances of surprise from Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and the White House national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, when he rejected a question's premise that he planned to reduce troops in Iraq.

has Powell been whispering in bed to Straw?

maybe just talking about time spans - but those don't really hold up. Yes, planning for 9/11 must have started before Bush entered the White House - it involved getting people into the USA, taking flying lessons, deciding on which planes to use, and so on, taking more than 9 months. I don't think it was an attack just against the Bush regime.

But the Turkey bombs have used homemade explosives, and were done, it's thought, by Turks. That would take less than a year - ie after Bush started sabre-rattling, and wanting Turkey to support him. So Straw's remarks are irrelevant (maybe even a strawman?)

that would be why Clinton personally warned Bush that Osama bin Laden was the greatest threat to the USA at the beginning of 2001.

I'll take their word over any that we give.

people in the world that think that. Of course the con lemmings back here will believe it too.:shrug:

the lemmings buy it...

I don't know how or why but B & B will recieve a boost in support because of yesterdays attacks.

So then, what was the cause? Michael Jackson?

i feel so... confident. so... secure. sigh. i love America. and i love george bush. sigh. snuggle. snore...

LOL!!!

If you believe that, I got some well priced bridges to sell to you. We lefty-anti-war dems were right about E.V.E.R.Y.T.H.I.N.G that is going down today in the middle east.

bridges cause there are a LOT of idiots obviously willing and eager to buy.

Yes the lefty anti-war dems are Right about everything!!!

Never be submissive to them!

"ASSHOLE BULLshyt and British Prime Minister Tony Blah declared Thursday that the invasion of Iraq was not to blame for the recent wave of terrorist violence and that the bombs that devastated two British facilities in Turkey proved the need to press ahead with the military campaign."

Who the hell told them it was not related? The tooth fairy?

I haven't been keeping count but it seems like there have been pretty many of these so-called terrorists attacks on BULLshyt's watch.

8^) all of them.

with this "bush" you have to read BOTH lips

they flap in different directions....which could be why he has problems with language

Bush raised the possibility of increasing the number of U.S. troops in Iraq. When a reporter mentioned the United States' announced plans to reduce troop levels, the president responded: "We could have less troops in Iraq, we could have the same number of troops in Iraq, we could have more troops in Iraq -- whatever is necessary to secure Iraq."

.....later....

A top aide to Bush, who briefed reporters after the news conference on condition that she not be identified, said that Bush was not announcing a change in policy and that expectations remained that troop levels would be reduced. "There is simply nothing to suggest that the number of American forces would need to increase," the official said. "In fact, the conversations with the commanders have gone the other way."


.....meanwhile....

Bush, who struck a defiant tone throughout the news conference, produced what appeared to be glances of surprise from Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and the White House national security adviser, Condoleezza Rice, when he rejected a question's premise that he planned to reduce troops in Iraq.

..................

will he or won't he reduce troops - he doesn't know and if he doesn't know then who does... his hairdresser?

Where would one get such an idea?

The first question to be asked: qui prodest?
who benefits?

of course: Bush and Blair

A massive anti-Bush demonstration has been planned in London and just before the demonstration the blasts in Istambul kills british officials

how convenient

and wouldn't go to any such trouble. They already had the Michael Jackson story as a cover for US TV, no need to worry about focus groups.

I think the timing of the attack was intentional; it was indeed terrorists sending a message to the Brits the only way they could.

a lot of things happened yesterday...

.


Al-Qaeda are the US govts greatest ally

By Rizvan Anwar
When Khalid Sheikh was arrested, he even said that Al Qaeda was no longer using e-mails or telephones to keep in touch, as it was too risky, and the CIA had tapped everything.

So I don't understand how these messenger boys send the e-mails on their donkeys.
It just isn't logical.

I sat there and watched Bush's interview again.
The smile, the confidence. It was just perfect.

If ever there was a time that the US and UK
needed an attack to occur against BRITISH
interests, it was well.at about 09:10 GMT
on 20 November 2003. 

Either Al-Qaeda doesn't know what it is doing,
or this wasn't Al Qaeda. Al-Qaeda want the world
to see the evil that Bush and Blair are doing. And
the protests would have done that. There was no
need to bomb Istanbul. The only, and reiterate ONLY
people to benefit from the bombings are Bush and
Blair. It diverted attention from the protests, to the
'terrorists'.

for the press conference.

Prior to the trip it was expected that while Bu$h & Blair gave their little press conference, the other side of the screen would be showing the protesters. This trip was supposed to be a PR disaster for W.

Rove desperately needed to salvage the situtation. A well timed terrorist attack against British interests was about the only thing that would knock off images of the protesters. So once again al Qaeda delivers right on cue.

After seeing W smirking and smiling about the whole thing yesterday a chill went down my spine. I am totally convinced that they are truly evil and very capable of doing such things. Of course, none of it is done directly. W doesn't sit in the Oval office issuing orders for the next attack. He doesn't have to. But if you believe the BCF, LIHOP or MIHOP on 9-11, then afer killing 3000 Americans in one day, the rest is easy.

The unstated question for the reader when they read "Bush, Blair Say Iraq War Is Not Cause of Attacks" is "Did the Iraq War make us less safe?"

The headline might just as easily have been "Bush & Blair: Attacks Prove the Need for the War on Terror".. never raising the possibility that the war on terror could be a CAUSE.

He really did seem to be in la-la land, trying the usual straw man arguments and trying quite pathetically to avoid the mater of whether or not the Iraq war has only served to breed terror.

Bush & Blair have succumbed to mission creep, invaded Iraq without any thought of the consequences and now it is ordinary Turks and British citizens that re paying the price. :grr:

"Osama Bin Forgotten" indeed.

What a miserable, simpering, whimpy ass man.

I saw him whining on CNN surrounded by some of the most THUGGISH looking bodyguards I have ever seen.

Good thing he has them to protect his sorry butt.

Desert Storm positioned and kept large numbers of US troops near Islamic Holy sites. This seems to have provided new inspiration to Al-Queda and other related groups.

From our perspective that war was over before Clinton took office. However, we remained there and kept up the bombing through the 90's. So perhaps, from their perspective it is just one long war that has inspired many things.

Yes, the planning for 911 began before GWB took office. The inspiration for the effort preceeded that. The more relevant question is what caused them to pull the trigger? You know, the concept of 'sleeper cells' ready to go and waiting for orders.

My thoughts? Simply having another George Bush in office was sufficient. Family is big in the middle east.

Great now we have the frekin' donkeys to deal with. :eyes:

I think junior has been away from god too long, don't you?

Time is getting closer!

"LONDON, Nov. 20 -- President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair declared Thursday that the invasion of Iraq was not to blame for the recent wave of terrorist violence and that the bombs that devastated two British facilities in Turkey proved the need to press ahead with the military campaign."

they also added that up was down, black was white and that 'ugly is the new cute'