Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
He did misrepresents the facts to the American people by selecting describing pre-war intel.
|
Again, the standard you set has no historic precedent. A President making a case for war by definition is going to select evidence that supports the case. By definition your argument can apply to any case ever made for war.
Quote:
|
And, he absolutely lied when he said Congress had access to all the pre-war intel that he had. That is irrefutable.
|
This, in my view is a focus on the trivial. If Bush had 1,000 pages saying Sadam was a threat and Congress had 999 pages saying he was a threat, you can say he lied, but the real point is that Sadam was a threat and everyone interested had enough information to draw an informed conclusion.
-----Added 2/12/2008 at 03 : 44 : 11-----
Quote:
Originally Posted by dc_dux
ace....why am I not surprised by your defense of Bush.....others did it before Bush and we dont have the right to know.
|
Gee, I have been the number 1 defender of Bush on TFP. I am not surprised that you are not surprised. Is there anything else we can not be surprised about? Hey, is this an example of tautology?