Originally posted by chegazHow plausible? And what's being denied? That he never believed there were WMD's or that that he was complicit in the misrepresentation of intelligence?
'Plausable Deniability' is what it is.....
I don't think the argument in this article even proves plausible deniability.
Originally posted by bjohnson407Your questions have given you the answer. That's how the system works.....I don't believe a 40 billion dollar a year intelligence service would make such a mistake....
How plausible? And what's being denied? That he never believed there were WMD's or that that he was complicit in the misrepresentation of intelligence?
I don't think the argument in this article even proves plausible deniability.
1 edit
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterWhy do you guys (correctly) dismiss leftist propaganda links as if you were too high minded to succumb to mindless zombie partisanship only to turn around and post tripe like D'Souza?
The claim that Bush lied is itself a lie, says Dinesh D'Souza:
http://townhall.com/columnists/DineshDSouza/2008/01/28/actually_bush_didnt_lie
Is there an honest bone in your body? Do you even care?
Originally posted by der schwarze RitterWhether or not Bush lied, it was quite obvious to anyone of reasonable intelligence at the time that what he was saying was untrue. What amazes me is not whether or not Bush lied (as that is normal for politicians), but how many people apparently believed everything he said.
The claim that Bush lied is itself a lie, says Dinesh D'Souza:
http://townhall.com/columnists/DineshDSouza/2008/01/28/actually_bush_didnt_lie
Bickering morons. The least you could do is debate the real issue instead of just spewing the same BDS that's been going around for five friggin years. Bush didn't declare war, the US Congress did. AFTER they looked at the same intel. The least we could do is debate the real issue. You don't hear us Republicans saying "Hillary lied! People Died!"
The United States of America is not ruled by a single person.
- Joined
- 30 Dec 07
- Moves
- 9905
Originally posted by MerkIt looks like it to me!
Bickering morons. The least you could do is debate the real issue instead of just spewing the same BDS that's been going around for five friggin years. Bush didn't declare war, the US Congress did. AFTER they looked at the same intel. The least we could do is debate the real issue. You don't hear us Republicans saying "Hillary lied! People Died!"
The United States of America is not ruled by a single person.
Originally posted by MerkJust as a matter of interest (I dont know a whole lot about US politics), did congress make their decision based on:
Bickering morons. The least you could do is debate the real issue instead of just spewing the same BDS that's been going around for five friggin years. Bush didn't declare war, the US Congress did. AFTER they looked at the same intel. The least we could do is debate the real issue. You don't hear us Republicans saying "Hillary lied! People Died!"
The United States of America is not ruled by a single person.
1. intel they received seperately, or intel from the White House.
2. public pressure due to speeches / statements made by the president and his aids.
I am not disagreeing with you, I just want clarification. I do agree that blame should not rest entirely on the President as it is a fact that a significant proportion of the US population including politicians supported the war and they should have been intelligent enough to realize that the President was not telling the truth, whether or not the president knew he was telling the truth.
Originally posted by MerkUttering your right wing bollocks again are we Merk?
Bickering morons. The least you could do is debate the real issue instead of just spewing the same BDS that's been going around for five friggin years. Bush didn't declare war, the US Congress did. AFTER they looked at the same intel. The least we could do is debate the real issue. You don't hear us Republicans saying "Hillary lied! People Died!"
The United States of America is not ruled by a single person.
http://encarta.msn.com/guide_whocandeclarewar/Who_Can_Declare_War_Backgrounder_and_Research_Guide.html
By early 2003, the Bush administration, together with the governments of the United Kingdom and Spain, insisted that Iraq was not adequately cooperating with the weapons inspectors, and they lobbied for a second UN resolution that would threaten Iraq with war if it did not disarm by a specific date. However, the three allies eventually realized their proposal did not have sufficient backing at the UN, and on March 17, 2003, said they would not seek a vote on the new resolution. After abandoning his appeal to the UN, President Bush declared, "The United States of America has the sovereign authority to use force in assuring its own national security." On March 20, U.S.-led forces began an attack of Iraq.
The president
The president of the United States has no clear constitutional authority to declare war without congressional approval. However, the U.S. Supreme Court has determined that the president, as commander-in-chief of the military, does have the authority to recognize a "state of war" initiated against the United States and may in these circumstances unilaterally send U.S. troops into battle. President Bush has also stated that his powers as commander-in-chief allow him to act independently in defense of the nation.
The president did not seek a formal declaration of war from Congress. But he did seek congressional support, he said, to demonstrate to the United Nations and to the world that military action against Iraq was not just his own objective
Originally posted by Thequ1ckAgreed. The "hugest" of differences. Clinton saw the same threat and the same reports that GW saw. The difference was that Bill knew that playing head games with inspectors and doin' the diplomatic dance charade was just not worth going to war over--I don't care HOW many violations of a worthless UN sanctions Saddam accrued. You don't put guys lives on the line when a protracted pissing contest will suffice.
Oh yeah, great analogy comparing Bush's advisors to Einstein.
Can you see the problem here, can you?
And anyway, there's a huge difference between building a weapon
and using it.