News-Record.com

After the 9/11 attack on the WTC, Bush was the one desperate to tie the attack to Iraq. He was so determined to get us involved in Iraq, he ignored the experts on terrorism AND the advice of his own father. If anyone misled the American people and congress, it was GWB.

Now I have one question, Lester. How many years passed between the first WTC attack and the second one? The fact that we have not been attacked on our soil since 2001 means absolutely nothing.

Yvonne,
Where have you had your head stuck so deeply in the sand? Oh I forgot, we did not find some big whopping pile of mass destruction apparatus. Yet, we gave them all the time in the world to move it all. Perhaps your idea of WMD is different than rational thought. WMD is where a bunch of folks can be killed at one time. What is the number assigned to Mass or a bunch? Would not the WTC be enough?

Come on now. No attacks since 9/11 and you cannot attribute that to our resolve to protect our country by taking the war to their back yard? It must be hard to breathe at all in sand that deep.

You Liberals have the option now to end the nightmare in Iraq. Since you so devoutly believe GWB is the one who mislead us into getting into this war, perhaps you will be as ready to blow your horn at the liberal democrats who talk your game but produce nothing.

Its just politics. Nothing more.

It WAS politics .. and because for three years the war was fought for politics .. it is now way more than politics, NCP.

==

The world trade center was taken down by the equivalent of a penknife .. so by your statement, a penknife is also considered a WMD?

==

I'm not sure I credit "taking the war to their back yard" as the reason for no attacks since 9/11. Certainly the FBI have been more diligent. Is it possible that the threat is not an everyday thing? They plan years in advance .. and the latest plan - flying in & blowing up planes on the 10th anniversary of Osama's Declaration of War on America was thwarted by .. remind me how the Patriot Act stopped that, how the Patriot Act ties in with MI5 and Scotland Yard? I'm still not clear .. thank in advance.

==

I'm disappointed with the same-ol' partisan BS going on in DC - but not sure ANYONE knows how to extract with grace. While no one is producing an end the nightmare in Iraq - except the surge which seems way too little, way too late - for you to deny "GWB is the one who mislead us into getting into this war" .. is just foolish - don't you agree?

"I have one question. Have we been attacked by terrorists in this country since we went to war?"

They struck a pretty good blow on 11/7/06.

The terrorists had to come to the USA for 911. Our current leaders have taken our citizens to them in Iraq so they can kill them there. Over 3200 to date. More than the WTC, with no end in sight. The surge has worked where we have placed our soldiers, the terrorists have just moved on to other places...largest number killed by a bomber this week. Is this better??? Are the lives of Americans more valuable that the lives of Iraqis?

Where Bush "lied" was not on the intelligence on WMD. It was on the intelligence that Iraq was some kind of a threat to the US. There was none, yet he spoke of it as if it were an unchallenged reality.

Lester said: "I have one question. Have we been attacked by terrorists in this country since we went to war?"

Hm. Let's see here... how often were we "attacked by terrorists in this country" (at least FOREIGN ones) before 9/11? Seems like it was just 1993. So can we agree that it's "normal" for America to get attacked once every 8 years? Seems like we need to wait and see if Bush can keep us "safe" until after 2009 before we start carrying on about how much better life is under his care.

NCP,

Rufus is right. I was trying to be polite in saying "misled". Bush lied about Iraq being a threat to the US.

BTW, if you poor misguided folks who support the poor misguided man in the WH would quit saying Bush didn't lie, we who know he did would quit saying he did.

"...when every leading Democrat said the same thing and Clinton appointee, CIA Director George Tenet, "guaranteed" the president that there were WMDs — but the media ignore this fact."

Actually, Lester, the media's definitely at fault here, but not like you think.

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-fg-feith9feb09,1,5687052.story?coll=la-headlines-nation

I blame the media on this one for not putting some serious thought and pressure on this matter of intel, as it seems that the intel that was being put into the hands of everyone was a fictional product, inconsistent with the actual intel agencies' opinions, not to mention reality.

.. don't ya wanna just go wash up after seeing a picture of Feith? He is just .... s l i m m y ..

Actually, the most recent major terrorist attack on the US preceding 9/11 was on 4/19/05.

I always thought the intel on WMD's appeared a little shady. I remember seeing Colin Powell's address to the UN and thinking "That's all they've got?"

If that was the sole basis for going to war with Iraq, I would not have supported the war. I'm not saying that I didn't believe WMD's were there. I just didn't think the CIA proved their case.

However, I felt other reasons sufficed and if Saddam hadn't tried to bluff somebody that had a straight flush, he might still be alive and in power.

A couple thoughts, NP:

CIA works for the President. If you "didn't think the CIA proved their case", then the President didn't prove his case.

"... if Saddam hadn't tried to bluff somebody .. " From what I've read, he was really trying to bluff Iran .. arch-enemy #1. If they knew he really didn't have anything, they would be "motivated" to swap the Q in Iraq for an N.

Now consider this: If that had started to happen .. we might AGAIN have decided to ally with Saddam .. who as NP suggests would be still alive and still in power .. and with the American God on his side allied against Iran.

Now wouldn't that be an interesting twist - and a highly plausable scenario. I need to write a book! JackAss can spell check for me.

"I always thought the intel on WMD's appeared a little shady. I remember seeing Colin Powell's address to the UN and thinking "That's all they've got?""

Me too. Seemed bogus (or at least trumped up) then, we know it was bogus now.

And then you have folks like ncpatriot above who say "They moved it all!" I find that even harder to believe because it would imply that we weren't watching.

ncpatriot: Do you really think that the USA, with the most sophisticated satellite imagery/tracking/surveillance technology in the world and an obvious interest in the location of these WMD would let them slip out of the country? Because to believe that we allowed those WMD to be moved elsewhere would imply that we're utterly incompetent. Which is it?

Yvonne,

Misled is probably more accurate than lied.

It was maddening to watch him parse his words so that he would have deniability later (i.e. "The British government has learned...."). The point is that he was being dishonest & consciously so.

"They struck a pretty good blow on 11/7/06."

Neo,

You can't associate the election with the terrorists.

Remember, they hate freedom.

I agree some of the LIEberal rhetoric is over the top .. but things like Rufus pointed out .. make it all seem so Animal Farm-ish.

"Actually, the most recent major terrorist attack on the US preceding 9/11 was on 4/19/05"

OK, please refresh my memory -- what happened in the US that was terror-related on that date? And it wasn't preceding 9/11, now was it?

I find it ironic that a young woman named Sara Beth Jones complains about her civil rights being dismantled. All the while, she is an op ed columnist for the N&R, has a website, a blog, and has the freedom to march in DC or wherever else she wants.

Yet another example of chicken little sensationalism. Other recent examples:

Firing US attorneys is the "greatest constitutional crisis of our time".

Punishing a kid by making him raise his hands up is equivalent to Chinese torture camps.

Not recent but my all time favorite:

Bush = Hitler

Dan:

Most recognize - and dismiss - the hyperbole you reference.

.. as a friend, do me a small favor: look past the hyperbole - there are matters of substance of there. Not all blue is bad; not all red is good.

Sorry, Nemo. Typo. That was meant to say 4/19/95 if you hadn't guessed already.

I want all of our guys and gals to come home and live the great dream. I want peace that works for everyone in all climates and in all political arenas. I want us to get along and work toward learning about cures.

I guess what we all want is just too much to ask for.

Noble ideas, ncpatriot, and not too much to ask for, even if your first post in this thead seemed to indicate otherwise.

Have you considered, by chance, the notion that perhaps the peace in this region you desire is untenable given our goals, techniques, and millenia of religious and tribal clashes?

JACKARMSTRONG! PAGING JACKARMSTRONG!! Your presence is needed in this thread to remind us to spellcheck our work before posting!