she's sorry, very sorry, I'm sorry too

FreeDuck wrote:

It was still the president who decided when and how to do it.

Wrong. The plan to invade Iraq has been in the making since the 1990's. Certain advisors to the president like Rumsfield, Wolfowitz, & Perle are the ones that are behind this war. GW is just their mouthpiece. Of course this doesn't make him innocent, but let's remember who the real villains are here.

Quote:

And ralpheb, I don't know why you are thanking Mr. Creasy for essentially proving that, contrary to what you said, congress did not declare war.

You're right, they didn't. Nobody did. There was never an official declaration of war for this conflict, but Congress overwhelmingly authorized it so the contention that they did not declare war is simply a semantic one.

0 Replies

John Creasy wrote:

FreeDuck wrote:
It was still the president who decided when and how to do it.

Wrong. The plan to invade Iraq has been in the making since the 1990's. Certain advisors to the president like Rumsfield, Wolfowitz, & Perle are the ones that are behind this war. GW is just their mouthpiece. Of course this doesn't make him innocent, but let's remember who the real villains are here.

In that, as Commander in Chief, and the repository of Congress' grant of war powers, Bush could have made a different decision, you contention doesn't let him off the hook at all. He, and he alone, was and remains ultimately responsible for all which has ensued.

0 Replies

John Creasy wrote:

FreeDuck wrote:
It was still the president who decided when and how to do it.

Wrong. The plan to invade Iraq has been in the making since the 1990's. Certain advisors to the president like Rumsfield, Wolfowitz, & Perle are the ones that are behind this war. GW is just their mouthpiece. Of course this doesn't make him innocent, but let's remember who the real villains are here.

While I am fully aware of the people behind PNAC and their writings, it was still the president who decided to accept their plan. Thus, the president decided when and how to do it. Someone else did the legwork, true, but the president is still the president.

Quote:

Quote:
And ralpheb, I don't know why you are thanking Mr. Creasy for essentially proving that, contrary to what you said, congress did not declare war.

You're right, they didn't. Nobody did. There was never an official declaration of war for this conflict, but Congress overwhelmingly authorized it so the contention that they did not declare war is simply a semantic one.

I'm trying to agree with you because I believe Congress bears some responsibility. However, the final decision was the president's to make. The resolution authorized him to use force (among other things) but did not require force. Force also does not equal invasion and occupation. If there were only a semantic difference between what they authorized and a declaration of war, wouldn't it have been simpler just to declare war?

0 Replies

Setanta wrote:

[
He, and he alone, was and remains ultimately responsible for all which has ensued.

If that's your take on it, fine. I don't see it as black and white as you do.

0 Replies

How very convenient for you. Just who do you propose could have forced him to do what he did not want to, or prevented him from doing what he was inclined to do?

You have no case, which is nothing new.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

I'm trying to agree with you because I believe Congress bears some responsibility. However, the final decision was the president's to make. The resolution authorized him to use force (among other things) but did not require force. Force also does not equal invasion and occupation. If there were only a semantic difference between what they authorized and a declaration of war, wouldn't it have been simpler just to declare war?

Fair enough. I do of course plant blame on the president, I guess I'm just saying that he's just doing what he's told. I think if his advisors told him not to go to war he wouldn't have. If they told him to get out right now , I think he would.

0 Replies

John Creasy wrote:

I do of course plant blame on the president, I guess I'm just saying that he's just doing what he's told. I think if his advisors told him not to go to war he wouldn't have. If they told him to get out right now , I think he would.

Oh I have no doubt that someone is pulling his strings and I hold those people responsible. However, none of them ran for office and took the oath. He doesn't have to be a puppet. He shouldn't have run for president if he didn't want to be president and if he wasn't prepared to at least try to make good decisions. If he wasn't up to the job, he shouldn't have taken it. I guess I believe that the leader of the free world doesn't get to avoid responsibility by saying he was just following orders. He's supposed to be the one giving them.

But certainly I agree that he didn't think up the whole disastrous plan on his own.

0 Replies

Donald Rumsfeld, Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle, Douglas Feith

"Two years later, he and Perle signed an open letter to President Bill Clinton calling for the United States to work to oust Saddam Hussein. Feith was part of a community of former national security officials in the 1990s who supported the work of Ahmad Chalabi and the Iraqi National Congress to encourage the US Congress to pass the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. That act was approved by Congress and signed into law by President Clinton."

"Feith also served with Perle on the board of the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA), a think tank that promotes military and strategic ties between the United States and Israel."

"O'Neill later clarified that these discussions(invasion of Iraq) were part of a continuation of foreign policy first put into place by the Clinton Administration."

0 Replies

she's sorry, very sorry, I'm sorry too

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know