Quote:
|
Originally Posted by dc_dux
Tully...I think its fair to say that some will never accept the fact that Bush lied to the American people, with the complicity of Congress who did not have access to the same intel, and much of the media.
|
I agree. I posted this elsewhere and a flame war flashed up rather quickly. But I think there are some that will just never admit, regardless of evidence, that this was a really stupid idea sold to the US tax payer with "cherry picked" information. Now McCullen's joined an ever growing list of insiders to come forward to confirm what many have been saying for a long time. I can't think of the who said it but didn't someone from within the White house talk about "rolling out a new product" and the timing? Didn't he say this months and months ago? I know I heard or read this somewhere, probably could go find it but really it wouldn't matter. Those who want to continue to believe this was the "right" thing to do and or we need to continue for whatever reason will still believe that regardless of what evidence comes out. I can remember watching a press conference with Bush himself where he admitted there were no WMD's. I was a very active member of another board at the time and even after the GOP POTUS clearly stated there were no WMD's many, many neo-cons and cons. wouldn't accept it. You know if the President of your own party tells you something you might want to consider the possibility you've been wrong about this issue all along. Nope! Even after Bush stated it as fact the issue was a hot topic of debate, complete with satellite photo's and unsupported stories of truck convoy's transporting mass amounts of WMD's to Syria in the dark of night. What night? Why didn't our massive satellite surveillance see this massive chemical exodus? Where are these WMD's now? No one knows. But it must have happened because they were there, they must have went somewhere... somehow, right?
I, like many around here, was completely with the President when he said we need to get the guys responsible for 9/11. I remember watching CNN and seeing a poll that showed Bush had something like a 95% approval rating and that 95% of people approved of going after Al Queda. I remember thinking "who the hell are the other 5% and what the hell are they thinking?" I supported, completely the military action in Afghanistan. I took very seriously the security concerns raised regarding Iraq, Saddam and the WMD's. But when Hans Blixer basically came back empty handed I thought "well that's good news, now we can stay focused on Afghanistan." When Bush and Co. continued with the sell job on Iraq I had many serious concerns. Remember LP's? Remember that sound the stereo used make when the needle would slide across the LP's surface?- that's sound that went off in my head.
On almost every point the Bush Administration has been wrong.
WMD's? Nope.
Link to 9-11? Nope.
Greeted as liberators? By some.
By the masses? Not really.
We're not going to need a large force, it'll be over with quickly. How long we been there now?
We'll not only stabilize Iraq, but the region as a whole will follow. Ever heard of an insurgency? How's that Middle East stabilization coming?
It'll basically pay for itself. Anyone know the current amount we've borrowed for this debacle?
Might last 6 days or 6 weeks, but I don't see it going on for 6 months. Hmm, might want to add years to that statement... and a zero.
Gas prices will drop. Fill up your tank lately?
I honestly can't think of anything that's turned out the way they said it would. I guess we knocked out the Iraqi Army quickly with "Shock and Awe." After that? Basically Bush and Co. have denied at all cost any of it's failures and short falls. Wasn't it Rumsfeld who said "it's been a catastrophic success?" What the hell does that mean? And any one who disagreed with the "plan" was basically fired and silenced. What was the General's name who stated were going to need at least 300K troops to do this? And what's he doing now?
Now we're there and we have to stay because if we leave Iraq will spin out of control. Not to mention the "surge" has worked and is working. Wasn't the surge supposed to lead to political gains? So the "surge" has been a success because of what political gains? None that I've heard of, all I keep hearing is there's less violence. Yeah, as long as we stay in large numbers and commit a ton of borrowed cash every day there will likely will be less violence. But do you really think this is the pathway to political gains in a region where the two major groups have been battling each other for centuries?
Sorry I don't see it and I don't trust the current Administration at all. I don't trust what they say about it and I don't trust their ability to manage the situation. A situation they created. The neo-cons got us in this mess and they have no idea how to get us out of it. Now we need to make some really hard choices. Personally I believe we're left with only bad options at this point. Leaving's going to likely be a mess. Staying may well sink our military and economy even farther. I'm willing to listen to anybody with any reasonable thoughts on how we deal with these issues.
So, Mr. McCullen's written a book confirming what many of us said all along. Great where were you with this info. several years ago when it could have made a difference? Sadly it likely wouldn't have mattered. If he'd spoke up then he'd likely be the same place the good General and his 300K troop advice currently are, sitting at home watching CNN and thinking "I fucking tried to tell them."