Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
O.k. you were lied to. Bush tried to sugar coat the fact that we wanted to use Iraq as the global front in the war on terror. Removing Sadaam was a secondary benefit. But, wait - he actually said that, he just did not put enough emphsis on it, so you are still right you were lied to.
Also, he lied because he left some with the impression the threat was more imminent than it actually was. I think we are splitting hairs. I think it all depends on how you define imminent, as Bill would say.
|
I believe were lied to because certain strategists in Washington believed that removing Saddam Hussein would inspire a far different reaction from Iraqis than it did and that Iraq would shortly become a model democracy in the ME from which would flow a regional renaissance toward free and open societies which would, in effect, fight terrorism for us. Not an ignoble vision, no. Ignorant of ME history and the level of sectarian volatility? Absolutely, yes.
We were lied to because they knew that Americans would never accept such a grand and visionary adventure. "The threat" was pure smoke and mirrors. But I guess I'm still splitting hairs.
I love it, now when a president lies and someone calls him on it, they're splitting hairs.
I tend think it's very important that they lied. I think it's very important that they decided to use 9/11 to try and make America into the purveyors of an unpopular and untested worldview while Bush and Cheney and Condi and Powell did a little softshoe number in front of the curtain.
I'm probably the most forgiving liberal on this board when it comes to our epic failure. I agree that opening up the ME to democracy and the global economy will marginalize terrorism. As well as make a lot of rich folks a lot richer - that was the "added benefit" - and as a matter of fact, it was what led to one of our biggest mistakes. We pushed away the ME strategists and people in the neo-con movement who would question the efficacy of our plan and strategy in favor of the businessmen who understood it as a monumental opportunity to make money without
really understanding the risks involved. As businessmen so often do. They are impatient and under the illusion of their own infallibilty until they lose. And they lost.