Bush brings the Lie Machine to Philly today:
President Bush speaks about his war policy to an audience at the World Affairs Council
Some interesting quotes:
Bush said that no country has formed a democracy without "challenges, setbacks and false starts."
Ain't that the truth! Particularly when an invading force is trying to set up a puppet regime (part theocracy, doncha know).
And we have to kill us some Iraqis in the process, of course:
"I would say 30,000 more or less have died as a result of the initial incursion and the ongoing violence against Iraqis," the president said. "We've lost about 2,140 of our own troops in Iraq."
The White House Counselor was quick to note later that this was not an official number (on Iraqi deaths) but W repeating estimates reported in the (liberal?) media.
Believe it or not, the Bush man actually too questions (the kill-factor came as a result of one) and fielded a question reported by AP like:
Another of Bush's questioners challenged the administration's linkage of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks with the Iraq war. Bush said that Saddam Hussein was a threat and he was widely believed to have weapons of mass destruction — a belief that later proved false.
Bush steadied his nerve, gritted his teeth and searched for an answer before coming up with:
"I made a tough decision," Bush said. "And knowing what I know today I'd make the decision again. Removing Saddam Hussein makes this world a better place and America a safer country."
Now, this is just an outright LIE.
We already know that Iraq had no WMD, no "yellowcake" and was not a threat to us or our that region.
There were no islamic terriers there in that secular nation before the war. Now there are.
And in bungled English, said W:
"Success will help the image of the United States," Bush said. "Look, I recognize we (sic) got an image issue, particularly when you've got Arabic television stations — that are constantly just pounding America, saying `America is fighting Islam,'
I cannot imagine why that could be.
12 comments:
Ain't that the truth! Particularly when an invading force is trying to set up a puppet regime (part theocracy, doncha know). = amen.
aaaaaargh. i just *hate* that guy. and his cornies. aaaargh. he still didn't answer the damn question. what is the direct correllation between 9/11 (our REASON for going to war) and the Iraqi war, or "peace-keeping" mission as Bush likes to call it.
"*hate* that guy. and his [cornies]."
maybe your word is better in reality.. :)
thanks for still hanging out in my overly serious blog.
I'll try to lighten things up a bit maybe this week.
Yeah, we got an image issue. I think Napolean had an image issue, too.
Acknowledging the tens upon tens upon tens of thousands of deaths, he then follows it up saying he'd do it all over again even though his "justification" has been proven false. That is just fucking moronic.
Gentle reminder--your favorite President, Clinton I, thought the same and said the same things about WMD, regime change and the dangers of Saddam in power. He just preferred to throw missiles instead of finishing the job.
As for fighting Islam(ists), well, we can either fight them, submit or die. Those are their choices.
Only when there is freedom of religion, everywhere, will we really be 'safe.' Think about that.
Robert, I will respectfully disagree with you about the ability of our current war to do anything about islamic crazies.
Also, just for the record, I did not vote for Clinton.
Though I will credit him with quite a record on the economy when presented up against the Bushmeister..
Sorry Mike, that was a generic "your favorite President."
The elections are going on right now. Most of our troops are going to be leaving in the next 18 months. Let's wait a few years and see the long term consequences before we render the verdict of history.
Sure, the outcome is unwritten, but the odds aren't in favor of us coming out as the good guys this time. Will any good we do in Iraq be handed back to us in an equal amount of "freedoms?" Not likely.
I won't render a verdict, but I expect others to admit that even if Bush's actions do work out for the better, his intent was still money and image driven, not freedom driven. Putting your own interests above an entire nations? That's not my President.
Look who came up for air.
I hope you had a good couple days "off".
Here's where we part company, Robert.
I don't have a problem using our resources finding crazy assholes that bomb us or our friends. But Iraq was not the front in this "war" it was a way for Bush to launder money.
Now, that being said, having a "war on terrorism" can't really be done, particularly the way it's being run now.
We're talking an idiology, not a country.
Then to top it off, on the home front, they played straight by the corporate-in-governments-pocket playbook and we're really close to:
Bringing the middle class to its collective knees; Having a serious meltdown in our general economy because of the budget deficit, trade deficit, personal debt, and national debt.
Now, let's assume that with Bush the war was a given, take away the tax breaks for the most wealthy, the bloated highway and energy give away bills and even then we're better off.
How is it that we are going to pay for so many mistakes??
Mike- i love your blog. someone's got to be serious and you've been given that job.
and, yeah...I meant "cronies", but "cornies" works too. maybe my spelling would have been better were I drunk. =).
Newvictorian -
"As for fighting Islam(ists), well, we can either fight them, submit or die. Those are their choices."
I think that something like 2/3 of the Muslims in America are American citizens, born and raised. I don't think they're out to get us.
Post a Comment