Wednesday, June 18, 2014
Don't Let The Liberals Erase and Rewrite History on Iraq
Notice the clips from 1998--when Clinton was president. Some are now saying that Democrats believed the "lying" President Bush; if you want to go that route, perhaps the evidence says that President Bush believed a lying President Clinton.
I don't think those politicians lied, I think they truly believed what they said. Every intelligence community on the planet believed it, too, which means the only liar was Saddam and his gang--and they paid the price for their lies. The lying is taking place now, by Democrats who want to rewrite history so that President Obama doesn't look like the failure that he is.
Here's video of what President Obama said in 2009, after The Surge's success, and what both he and Joe Biden were saying when it was introduced by President Bush.
I say again: The lying is taking place now, by Democrats who want to rewrite history so that President Obama doesn't look like the failure that he is.
Update, 6/19/14: Here's Slow Joe in 2010:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
There is one tangible difference pre Bush -- Saddam was actually USING chemical weapons, so we KNEW he had them. Bush 2 ... had good, or at least decent, intelligence that they still had them and might be a threat ...and I completely agree with you that Saddam tried to maintain that facade ... so, no one is lying, no one is a hypocrite, on our side. So --I don't see how the Democrats pointing out that we didn't find WMDs is really hypocritical. What I CAN agree with, is that Obama's handling of Iraq is one of the most profound failures of US foreign policy, ever ... right up there with the isolationism that kept us out of WW II until we
were directly affected ... allowing Hitler to gain strong toe holds and commit massive genocide. Obama's premise, that if we withdraw, we'll be left alone, is entirely incorrect. And, not even many Iraqis support these people ... I think our only hope is Israel ... because they have the most vested interest, and even when Obama gets done playing golf in Palm Springs, attending fundraisers, and 'discussing' options? We're not going to send in troops, and air strikes alone won't do it. It baffles me that he was re-elected ... or even that he got elected in the first place. But then ... the Republicans sent up their versions of Al Gore and John Kerry against him ... McCain and Romney, and ... no place in a Presidential campaign for a third party. Republicans got what they deserved, and I just get to be frustrated. Hopefully a viable party will nominate someone competent in 2016...
The current lie is that Iraq was a mistake, that the current collapse is President Bush's fault.
Well ... Iraq was likely a mistake. Getting them out of Kuwait, no (although? Kuwait may very well have been deserving of an invasion, and Bush 1 may have given Iraq a wink and a nod to go in); not finishing the job, yes; Bush 2 going back ... not a lie, but it certainly isn't working out well. But ... that's not Bush's fault. That's entirely on Obama and his wussification of foreign policy. I seriously haven't seen anyone blame Bush for the current collapse, and I watch/read a number of news sources ... to me, it seems like the critics want to blame Bush for putting Obama in to a position where his foreign policy incompetence could be revealed ... and then focusing on that, rather than the more pressing problem of Obama's naiveté and incompetence ...
Max: "I seriously haven't seen anyone blame Bush for the current collapse..."
Does this count? "The man to blame for what’s happening in Iraq is not President Obama — it’s President Bush." http://www.salon.com/2014/06/16/sorry_george_w_bush_but_this_whole_mess_is_still_your_fault/
-Mark Roulo
Post a Comment