Borrowed Time - Bush

Bush treats Iraq like a public-relations problem that can be addressed with the right spin. But that tactic won’t work indefinitely
WEB EXCLUSIVE COMMENTARY
By Eleanor Clift
Updated: 4:09 p.m. ET June 18, 2004

June 18 - No weapons of mass destruction. No Al Qaeda connection. No wonder George W. Bush is in denial. The finding of the 9/11 commission that there is no credible evidence linking Iraq to the September 11 attacks removed another pillar in the shaky rationale Bush used to justify the war. 

Bush’s fate is tied to the outcome in Iraq, which continues to worsen. Two top Iraqi officials were assassinated in the last week; a bomb blast brought oil production to a standstill and dozens of Iraqis were killed and 100 more wounded by a bomb as they stood waiting at an Army recruiting station. Bush blamed the escalating violence on the approaching June 30 date to hand over sovereignty, as though the situation will improve once the interim government is in place.

http://msnbc.msn.com/id/5240127/site/newsweek/

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

brave soul that you are, the "sarin gas" shell (singular) was so old it was obviously left over from when Reagun gave Saddam chemical weapons to fight the Ayatollahs

as far as quotes go, you'll have the list in a few minutes from the DUer's who save those things, if not I'll be back tomorrow with them

welcome to DU and enjoy your stay :hi:

www.talkingpointsmemo.com

On October 7, 2002, in a televised, primetime speech on the threat from Iraq, President Bush said:

We know that Iraq and al Qaeda have had high-level contacts that go back a decade. Some al Qaeda leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al Qaeda leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year, and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks. We've learned that Iraq has trained al Qaeda members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September the 11th, Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America. Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists.

Two weeks earlier, in a press conference with Colombian President Alvaro Uribe he said:

The war on terror, you can't distinguish between al Qaeda and Saddam when you talk about the war on terror.

Any given day. You can't distinguish between al-Qaeda and Saddam. (For more administration assertions of the dubious link between Iraq and al-Qaeda, check out the IRAQ'D mixtape sweepstakes.) If the American people mistakenly think Saddam is tied to 9/11, it's not surprising. On that count, I think I agree with Dick Cheney.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Bush and Rummy and Cheney continue to try and draw the connection between Saddam and "terrorists"

While Saddam did pay Palestian suicide bombers, he has nothing to do with Al Qaeda, in spite of the speeches Cheney and Bush have given trying to link the two

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washington/articles/2004/06/16/bush_backs_cheney_on_assertion_linking_hussein_al_qaeda?mode=PF

It should serve as no surprise that most Americans were shocked to realize that no credible sources point to a Saddam/AlQaeda link, as the 9/11 Commission spells out. That's the gist of this story, and that's why the press is all over it. It comes as no shock to most of us here, of course, but your story may be different.

I've really heard and seen all that I need to, and still believe the administration led this nation into an unjust and immoral war. If you wish to convince me otherwise, then I would say the burden of proof lies with you. Show me, please, the concrete evidence that the Administration did not try to lead the public to believe there was a link between Saddam and Al-Qaeda.

I believe the commission stated that there were connections; but, no collaborative ties in any actions against the US. If one were to listen carefully, the language used by Shrubby and company implies collaboration via similar goals. A, they both hate us and want us to be destroyed; therefore, must be working together inference. Yes, there were meetings between officials of both sides with invitations to work together advanced by Osama; however, Saddam Hussein fully rejected those advances. Apparently he felt Osama bin Laden was a greater threat to him than the US was. As to the training camp in Iraq, very little mention is being made that the camp was in US protected space where Saddam could not get at it. Shrubby's group is also still referencing the meeting in Prag which has been refuted because one of the principles (Osama's supposed rep) was here in this country when the meeting supposedly took place. Spin, spin, spin until everyone gets dizzy is the plan of the day.

Go from Al-Queda to OBL(Al-Queda's boss,remember?)and then go to 911,which is OBL's work.That wasn't so hard,was it? Enjoy your short stay.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

and why does it matter?

the true question is, why did we go to war in Iraq? that is the burning question.

We should have stayed in Afghanistan and finished the job instead of siphoning money and delta forces from the hunt for OBL to go to Iraq

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

MSNBC that was posted here in the "editorials and other articles" board

no one here said that

He was also filling mass graves with men, women, and CHILDREN, until the day we invaded. This brave man had to tuck tail and run at that point. Does anyone here hate children and want to see them dead?

re you post of Saddam killing the "children" which he did with the gas that Reagun and Bush I gave him, years ago, what about these children of Fallujah just a few months ago also killed by ammunition made in the good old USA only this time it was Marines doing it?

GET OUR GUYS OUT OF THAT HELLHOLE that Bush created

are you aware of how many UN resolutions that Israel has ignored? Why not invade them as they kill women and children regularly also, in addition to bulldozing houses and making land grabs

While I don't really take a side on the whole Palestinian/Israeli mess, using your logic Israel should have been at the top of the list if the US decided to "grown a backbone" for the UN

http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20040618111509990008

Linking Saddam and Al Queda... attempting to say "they never said Iraq and 9-11" is like asking what the meaning of 'is' is.

where did he go? I thought he like a "good political debate"

:evilgrin:

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Bill Clinton never had Sex with Monica, and therefore never committed perjury when he said he hadn't.

What is the meaning of 'is'?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Clinton asked for a definition, under oath, what the definition of sex was. They gave him one, and USING THIER DEFINITION, he said he never had sex with her.

By the definition given, he didn't commit perjury.

Ask for AlQueda in Iraq... they were in Kurdish territory. We should have flattened thier encampment, but couldn't because they were TRAINING KURDS TO OVERTHROW SADDAM HUSIEN. Since I highly doubt Saddam would support his own overthrow...

There is no Saddam/AlQueda link.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

It would have cost less money, time, and lives on both sides.

So, is it ok to kill 10,000 Iraqis to get one man who was not a threat to the United States out of power?

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

bringing up Hitler and WWII is a red herring, we were already in the Lend Lease program, Germany had sunk a bunch of our ships and killed a bunch of our merchant marines before Pearl Harbor. Germany and Japan were allies remember? We took on one, we took on the whole alliance. Fallacious argument and totally off point


And btw the only reason that so many Iraqi civilians were killed was because Sadaam was using them as human shields and putting artillery pieces and SAM sites next to schools and hospitals. If anyone is responsible for the vast majority of those deaths it is Sadaam himself.

Those CHILDREN wouldn't have been killed if we hadn't gone in with "shock and awe" and the pics I posted were from one full year after Bushie's speech on the aircraft carrier.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

"I bet you never served."

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. It's no litmus test for love of country, quickdraw. We realize that. But, since it seems to be the thing you run to when losing an argument, I'm afraid that you'd be quite surprised at how many DUers are veterans.

Ha, ha, ha... and nice try. Nightie-night.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Speaking of beating enemies through passiveness, how much are you enjoying the way al-Sadr is pushing the United States Army around? I'm not enjoying it half as much as you, Mr. Military Scholar.

You threatened to leave and check back in the morning quite awhile ago, but since you really want a reply, here ya go.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Did you serve?

You question the patriotism, gravitas, and historical knowledge of any poster when you quantify "Did you serve" with "Your post means nothing if you didn't."

I'm so weary of suffering fools on these boards. Please think about going back from whence you came in the morning, if not sooner.

In the meantime, enjoy the war, and the horror show that you seem to appreciate and enjoy so much more than the rest of us.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

He gave a decent sound bite at Ground Zero a few days after the attacks, but it went downhill from there.

I had no problem with him going into Afghanistan either, just wished he would have finished the job

other than that? nope, nothing springs to mind

Besides what were we supposed to do, let them shoot at out soldiers and planes and not respond? Then I can guarantee you'd be criticizing Bush for not doing enough to protect the soldiers. Know what a catch 22 is?


They wouldn't have had our soldiers to shoot at if our soldiers had been fighting where AlQaeda was in the first place.

nighty nite yourself, come back when you can follow the argument and answer the points poised instead of making assumptions (I bet you never served) and then not waiting for an answer

Germany declared war on us. The isolationist Republicans in Congress (supported by the America First movement) refused to declare war on Germany. We didn't go to war because Hitler was murdering Jews. We did it because HE ATTACKED US. Immediately after declaring war, the Germans began sinking ships in sight of U.S. territory... you could see burning ships from the beach.

Germany was the biggest industrial power in Europe. Japan had the 3rd Largest Navy in the world. Iraq was and is a 3rd world nation that we destroyed during Desert Storm.

BTW... I spent Desert Storm aboard a warship. Where did you spend it?

I spent Operation Enduring Freedom (the initial attack on Afghanistan) aboard a warship.

I spent Operation Iraqi Liberation aboard a warship.

I'm a 20 year veteran of the Unites States Navy. Don't you quote JS Mill to me, I SERVED, and served proudly. I put my own frail body 'between my own loved home and war's desolation'. And the Chicken Hawk in office now refused to serve overseas... got himself into a champagne National Guard outfit that wasn't going to be sent for anything short of WW3... and then he couldn't even be bothered to show up.

So many Iraqi citizens were killed because we dropped bombs on them. "Oh, it's Saddam's fault, he MADE us do it" belongs right next to the Japan apologists "It's not Japan's fault, FDR MADE them bomb Pearl Harbor".

Well, now, we've stopped the killing in Iraq. Shall we send the troops into Sudan and stop the killing there? How about the Congo? Maybe we should enforce UN resolutions on ISRAEL now. Quick, we've got to ignore the UN to teach Iraq that the UN cannot be ignored.

Where are we going as a nation? The choice seems clear to me. Authoritarian Fascism or Representative Democracy.

And, to cut off an attempt to link Socialism to Fascism (yes, the party was called 'National Socialist Workers Party. East Germany was 'The Democratic Republic of Germany'. Think they were a democratic republic because they said they were?) let me quote an expert on Fascism...
"Fascism should be properly called Corporatism, as it is a merging of the corporation with state power"... Benito Mussolini.

Thanks for the much-needed history lesson. I mean that! Beautiful post, and thank you. :D

I should calm down and go to bed.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

So bite me, honestly.

Didn't you say "Last post, I swear, seriously, I mean it this time" a full hour ago? See your own post #23 for further evidence, even though facts are not your strong suit.

Nighty-night.

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

"How I Feel About America"

An Essay, by VolcanoJen

Are you serious, quickdraw? You've likely had a bit too much to drink, and thought it would be fun to come into DU and stir up some trouble. I've got about 10,000 posts under my belt, so how's about doing a quick search to figure out where I stand and how my politics align with yours? It's funny how entirely lazy conservatives can be, when busy disrupting.

How many words am I limited to in my Thesis, Professor Quickdraw?

and my apologies for your C in C getting you into a shitestorm

Of course the troops have to defend themselves, too bad you didn't have the equipment and men you needed to do the job right. That is a big part of the reason I'm so mad at this Iraqi adventure

Bush sent our guys over there without enought boots on the ground to bring any stability to the area in the power vacuum left after the fall of bagdad

he didn't send armoured HumVees or enough flack jackets, water or food for the ones on the point of the spear

You have been confined to "force protection" because there aren't enough MP's and Iraqi's to enforce order

The whole damn war has been FUBAR by all accounts, and the general's warned Rummy but the neocons wouldn't listen

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

but plenty of the other troops did esp the poor reserves and guard guys

But I bet the Iraqis aren't having a very good time. I am so mad at Bush and Co cuz of the absolutely terrible planning for this whole mission

While I still don't get why we had to do Saddam RIGHT NOW THIS SECOND, I think it's criminal that he put our guys in harms' way without making sure to protect them and the civilians even if it meant waiting for 6 more months or whatever. Saddam wasn't going to do anything in the near future to us that justifies our guys getting killed to the tune of 900 and counting and the many fine folks who have been so horribly maimed due to lack of armor

Don't believe we don't care about our guys over there WE DO

we just don't believe that blind loyalty is an American trait. I was raised to keep a sharp eye on politicians so i do :)

You're going to question my service? ("I didn't have the luxury of being on a warship far away from any danger.") I've been shot at, ace. By weapons sold to Iran by Oliver North (Republican and traitor), with the backing and approval of President Ronald Reagan. I was there when the USS Stark was hit by a Iraqi missile (paid for by the United States, purchased from France) and got to help clean up the 37 dead there. Remeber USS Cole? I do. That was back when being in the Army was safe, and being in the Navy was hazardous. Remember Princeton and Tripoli? They hit mines in Iraq War I. Remember Sammy B? She hit a mine, too.

Move on? Back on the subject... There are NO links between AlQueda and Saddam. Bushco says there are. He's lying. There are links between AlQueda and Iraq. They operated in Kurdish Territory, trying to help the Kurds overthrow Saddam. There are links between AlQueda and the Taliban government in Afghanistan. WHY ARE WE WASTING TIME, MONEY AND LIVES IN IRAQ WHEN ALQUEDA IS NOT A MAJOR FORCE THERE. Or wasn't until after we invaded; now they are there recruiting the next wave of suicide bombers using the fact that we blew up innocent Iraqis for WMD's that weren't there. Oh, I forgot, we found 1 shell... a shell so old that it didn't hurt a single person when it went off. May all WMD's used against U.S. citizens (including our soldiers) be so effective.

No 'tons of WMD'. No Saddam/AlQueda link. Losing control of Afghanistan. Hundreds of U.S. servicemen dead. Thousands of U.S. Servicemen injured, some maimed for life. Thousands of Iraqis dead. Tens of thousands Iraqis maimed for life. And AlQueda is laughing at us.

I missed this dust-up as it was going down. what was the poster's name that had their posts deleted?

I applaud the responses, but am curious as to who and what was said in opposition.

And I'm glad you made it back alive.

And thank you for that excellent, EXCELLENT history lesson.

it was not the time to worry about Saddam, when we needed to focus on Afghanistan and OBL

what claim were we supposed to back up? What subject have we changed?

I notice you didn't answer any of my posts, or rebut any of my arguments... enlighten me please!

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

that was an MSNBC editorial, nobody here said it

I didn't bring up Clinton (altho the reply that did was funny as hell) and the Israel thing was just following your logic of going to war because of UN sanctions.

I was trying to get you to give us a good reason why we were in Iraq in the first place, since that was the gist of the article, the fact that Bush's reasons for going to war are falling apart

No weapons of mass destruction. No Al Qaeda connection. No wonder George W. Bush is in denial. The finding of the 9/11 commission that there is no credible evidence linking Iraq to the September 11 attacks removed another pillar in the shaky rationale Bush used to justify the war.

I don't see anywhere it quoting Bush re Saddam/9/11

Another desperate, pathetic right-wing talking point sorely in need of an update, a makeover, if you will.

So, if the UN is about worthless, then why did your beloved Chimpy run to them for approval of the Iraqi Sovereignty hand-over?

Just curious... I mean, what the hell does he need the UN for?

ROFL why would Jews need suicide bombers in Palestine? They have tanks and helicopters and guns galore thanks to us

And the UN scandal is just that, a scandal, too bad it's not the only one

Plame outing
Halliburton investigations
Abu Gharib

to name just a couple

and tell me if you think Bush saw a connection between Iraq and 9/11
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030319-1.html

some pretty good word parsing here

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x57293

It doesn't get much plainer, really, does it?

Acting pursuant to the Constitution and is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

—President Bush, in a letter to Congress outlining the legal justification for commencing war against Iraq, March 18, 2003

Acting pursuant to the Constitution and is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations >,< including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

that little comma makes all the difference, he is asking in this to go after ANY international terrorists, INCLUDING those who planned etc etc

but it's right on the lines of "what is, is"

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

Get over yourself.

DU: The Last 24 Hours:

257 Posts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=630553&mesg_id=630553

107 Posts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=628516&mesg_id=628516

210 Posts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1791620&mesg_id=1791620

97 Posts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1816578&mesg_id=1816578

Get over yourself.

Democratic Underground: The Last Two Hours

97 Posts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1816578&mesg_id=1816578

210 Posts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=104&topic_id=1791620&mesg_id=1791620

257 Posts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=630553&mesg_id=630553

107 Posts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=628516&mesg_id=628516

114 Posts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=630988&mesg_id=630988

95 Posts:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=105&topic_id=1295891&mesg_id=1295891

me
QD
HH
VJ


not getting too much play at all it seems

Chewtoys are fun for awhile, and then the mod locks the thread.

I've had enough of ego-feeding and fool-suffering for one night... what do you say we stop? The Mods are resting, as is well deserved, so I'm volunteering to police my damned self.

:D Hope we can hold Hawkeye back, though!

and none of us "alerting"

we are soooo bad ROFL :spank:

He'll be like... wtf??? }(

and he'll find his little MSNBC article locked

too funny, but we did pretty good without being too hard on the poor kid, maybe it'll help him think about a few things eh?

Hawkeye is posting here? I missed it!

Hawker! The name is Hawker! How often must I be confused by my counterpart HawkeyeX?

who is Hawkeye ;)

I wish the moderator had been less protective, all 4 of you seem to be giving reasonable and well-informed rebuttals. You usually do! But in this case, I really can't tell because I get to read only the one side. I don't get the pleasure of saying to myself, "Yes, AZ or VJ, or HH) really said it right that time.

And these guys did an awesome job here tonight. Informative, intelligent, and no personal insults. Wonderful...........