Tuesday, April 04, 2006

For the Absolute Last Time, Bush Lied

No, not necessarily about Iraq having WMDs (though I still think that what he did constitutes dishonesty at the very least) but about whether Iraq having WMDs had any bearing on whether or not we would invade:

Via the old NYT:

LONDON — In the weeks before the United States-led invasion of Iraq, as the United States and Britain pressed for a second United Nations resolution condemning Iraq, President Bush's public ultimatum to Saddam Hussein was blunt: Disarm or face war.

But behind closed doors, the president was certain that war was inevitable. During a private two-hour meeting in the Oval Office on Jan. 31, 2003, he made clear to Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain that he was determined to invade Iraq without the second resolution, or even if international arms inspectors failed to find unconventional weapons, said a confidential memo about the meeting written by Mr. Blair's top foreign policy adviser and reviewed by The New York Times.

"Our diplomatic strategy had to be arranged around the military planning," David Manning, Mr. Blair's chief foreign policy adviser at the time, wrote in the memo that summarized the discussion between Mr. Bush, Mr. Blair and six of their top aides.

"The start date for the military campaign was now penciled in for 10 March," Mr. Manning wrote, paraphrasing the president. "This was when the bombing would begin."


So! All that pre-war guff about war being our last resort and the necessity if attacking Iraq because it was a clear and present danger was solely a charade for the cameras, just like the hippy who always wears sandals into the coffee shop said. Great. Bush used to say that he prayed for peace; did he have his ifngers crossed or what?

4 comments:

A Wiser Man Than I said...

This, or something of the like, could be grounds for impeachment if the Dems recapture the House and Senate.

Not that it particularily matters. The only legitimate defense for Bush's behavior is that he's not Gore/Kerry. Those who rationalize and defend the lesser of two evils couldn't give too wits about lying.

It is interesting that he's "finally" been caught, if not altogether surprising.

troutsky said...

Nothing will be done about his lies or Kennedys or Johnsons (Nixon was busted over one of hundreds,as was Clinton)Or Bush1 or the next Clinton.Do the French workers and students wait around for the Skull and Bones to condemn one of their own? Do the people of Latin America sit and whine while their water is privatized or factories shut down or oil wealth go to the elite? Hell no.We are living a dream ,fellas,a dream that some sort of democracy exists, that the people have some sort of power as they watch the Today Show.

A Wiser Man Than I said...

Shhh, you mustn't tell people that their vote doesn't count. The 2000 election "proved" that it does. If you don't vote you have no right to complain.

Nevermind that the choice is akin to between a hanging and a beheading.

I'm waiting to hear that Bush had sex in the oval office, not because I actually believe he did, but merely because it's so much fun to see the neo-cons try to do mental gymnastics to defend their boy.

And yes I know the impeachment was about lying, but that seems to be beside the point, in the light of the present post.

troutsky said...

Check out neo-neocon blog, they are still parsing possibilities that Saadam was down with alQaeda.Its unbelievable the way people cling to shreds.