Bernie wrote-
Quote:And on the matter of whether these dipshits can be trusted (as if there's any question)..
Quote:
Scoop for Spanish Daily: Transcript of Private 2003 Bush Talk Promising Iraq Invasion
By E&P Staff
Published: September 26, 2007 8:00 AM ET
NEW YORK El Pais, the highest-circulation daily in Spain, today published what it said was the transcript of a private talk between President George W. Bush and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar on February 22, 2003, concerning the coming U.S. invasion of Iraq. It took place at the ranch in Crawford, Texas.
The conversation took place on the President's ranch in Crawford, Texas. The source for the leak was said to be someone in the Spanish government.
Bush purportedly said he planned to invade Iraq inf March "if there was a United Nations Security Council resolution or not....We have to get rid of Saddam. We will be in Baghdad at the end of March."
He said the U.S. takeover would happen without widespread destruction.
It seems to me that the intemperate language used in the intro to describe a democratically elected government (twice) constitutes an attack on the American way of life which might be excused coming from someone who is not in receipt of the stupendous benefits the American way of life provides but not from someone who probably derives more benefits than the average American. Biting the hand that feeds.
It is also unnecessary and weakens the argument it purports to serve. In fact it may be a last resort for an argument that is running out of steam.
The quote itself is somewhat dubious containing as it does expressions such as "what it said was" and "The source for the leak was said to be someone" and "purportedly said". Any one of which is enough to measure the lightweight nature of the report which also might serve the function of Mr Bush having no further personal dealings with members of the Spanish government.
Further to that the expression which "it is said" Mr Bush used ;"We have to get rid of Saddam", gives the false impression that the policy is that of Mr Bush alone when in actual fact it is, or was, the policy of the whole administration for which Mr Bush speaks and takes responsibilty for and which had almost complete bi-partisan support as it also did in the UK.
The reasons the administration had come to such a conclusion, using an enormous array of expertise over a long period of time, are way above the heads and capacities of posters here.
PS- Saddam Hussein's rule by terror went way beyond gassing and beheading. Too evil to speak about in civilised company. And he was bringing his sons up to continue what he had set in train.
Principles requiring no sacrifice are skin deep.
