We went to war over THIS?

These retro decisions are really tough. It may have depended on the perceived likelyhood of fruitation of those "weapons of mass destruction-related program activities."

The fact that Dubya and his handlers are liars is probably not especially important.

The fact that Dubya and his handlers are goddam liars is probably not especially important.

The fact that Dubya and his handlers lied in order to do what they felt like doing -- and didn't think they could get away with doing if they didn't lie -- is probably not especially important.

The fact that so goddam many citizens of this country actually buy into any of Dubya's bullshit -- and are convinced that he and his handlers did not really lie -- IS VERY IMPORTANT.

How do you wake these people up?

Beats the hell out of me. I've never slept that soundly.

Last night my kids asked why does he talk to the people like they're stupid? Well... you have to remember who is doing the speaking... but you could say he sure does know his audience... hmm. What to do? I'm baffled. People thrive on fear I guess.

Traditionally most Americans take a detached attitude to foreign affairs unless it affects them directly, and so far Iraq has not. It is this "what-ever" attitude that allows Bush to get away with his outrageous prevarications.

Answer to your first question (thread title):

Uh.....yeah. I mean, yes, yes we did.

Answer to your second question:

I didn't support going to war in the first place, so even if they had already found caches of weapons it wouldn't make me feel better.

This is what it looks like when people lie, do something reckless and stupid, it turns out badly and they resort to more lies to try to cover it up.

I give the American voter a bit more credit than some of you do. I believe they are more cognizant of this administration shell game than we think.

Sure hope so.

We'll see in November.

Frankly I was very amused at the people buying the WMD specter. They were gullible to degrees I had not thought possible.

To me this isn't an issue of "hindsight". The overwhelming majority of the world was not stupid enough to buy the apocalyptic scenarios being touted without seeing at least a modicum of evidence to back it up.

Without the post 9/11 irrational paranoia most Americans wouldn't have bought it either.

That's interesting. Is the irrational paranoia over? Does that spell doom for Bush, if so?

Yes I think fear is the stronger factor working here rather than the usual America "whatever attitude".

I couldn't bring myself to watch or listen to Bush, but I gather what he had to say was underwhelming. I listened to some polticians on NPR afterward, and these included key Republican senators (McConnell and Frist) who both suggested that he didn't need to lay out any bold new initiatives, because he'd already accomplished so much.

Scary thought...

I'm with our resident rapper on this one. I'm sure PDiddie will recall, as may others, that i stated before the Shrub's dirty little war that i didn't care if the lunatic sunuvabitch did have weapons of mass destruction, he was contained, and war was unnecessary.

I've noted that in these fora, many members with conservative sympathies have already made the rhetorical shift, and now avoid any discussion of weapons of mass destruction. They take a ludicrous self-righteous attitude about removing a dangerous dictator, to end the suffering of the Iraqis, as if that were somehow noble, but the same nobility does not oblige us to intervene in the Sudan, in the Congo, in Myanmar, etc.

I think it's subsiding but it will get booster shots with a "remember the Alamo" type reference every now and then.

Yeah, but the references are themselves becoming SO redundant that I think their power may be well diluted.

Again, sure hope so.

Joe, no offense but, if you're going to point out a lie, get it all:

It wasn't just that Saddam had WMDs.

It was that those WMDs posed an IMMINENT threat to the security of the US.
.
The threat was IMMINENT.

IMMINENT !

Which is why we couldn't wait to build a coalition.


Acquiunk gets at the heart of the matter:
"Traditionally most Americans take a detached attitude to foreign affairs unless it affects them directly".


Traditionally, most Americans take a detached attitude to EVERYTHING unless it affects them directly.

"I get health care, so that's not an issue."
"My kids are in decent schools so tough luck for kids who aren't."
"I have a job, so no big deal there."
"The deficit? Uh, I don't really get that stuff at all."
"My son/daughter didn't die in Iraq, so it doesn't matter why we went there."
"Terrorists are stronger and more anti-America now than ever, but hey, are you ready for some FOOTBALL!"



It's called apathy.

Clearly, the Republicans know that. The Dems still haven't figured it out. When they do, they'll know how to tell the right lies at the right time, they'll know how to focus on "issues" that have a complexity level in keeping with the average American's 30 second attention span, and they'll know how to suck up to the self-perpetuating corporate interests in this country.

Then, perhaps, they'll be able to win an election and try to get something done in keeping with true decent caring American values.


Nah.

Dunno, most people are stupid. They probably see it differently than you do.

Joe, if I had a hat, I'd tip it to you.

You hit a home run with that post. Nothing more effective than taking the words directly from the mouth of a liar and shedding light on it for all to see.

If there are any posts that should be encouraged, its this kind. To the point, fairly brief, effective, accurate, cited, and straightfoward. Bush has mislead and straight up lied on so many things, I think posts of this nature should be done on them as well.

Anyone else up to the task?

Bush did say one thing last night that I can agree with: Athletes shouldn't use steroids. Of course, this has nothing to do with what a President should be doing, but still. Credit where it's due, I say...

Re: We went to war over THIS?


LOL!!