A little bit of honesty from Bush

Gato_Solo said:
You drew the conclusion from the speech because that's what you wanted to hear. You can't blame the President for your own faults...
Click to expand...


1. Who's to say you didn't draw the opposite conclusion because it's what you wanted to hear?

2. Are you able to reply to a post you disagree with without resorting to name calling, finger pointing, condesending remarks and/or hostility?

Anyway...

GW said:
Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications, and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.
Click to expand...

GW said:
Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained.
Click to expand...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...0030128-19.html
 
Gato_Solo said:
Too bad the trend is showing approval rates growing, right?
Click to expand...
Too bad the majority don't approve right?


You also need to look at the whole thing. You'd be surprised what you find...but that would require you to be openminded...
Click to expand...
Here's a good one....

In making its case for the war with Iraq, do you think members of the Bush Administration intentionally misled the public or not?

 
rrfield said:
1. Who's to say you didn't draw the opposite conclusion because it's what you wanted to hear?

2. Are you able to reply to a post you disagree with without resorting to name calling, finger pointing, condesending remarks and/or hostility?
Click to expand...

And where did I call anyone a name, make a condescending remark, or show hostility? Looks like someone is not paying attention...

rrfield said:
Anyway...

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/rele...0030128-19.html
Click to expand...

And that says the President linked the terrorist attacks with 9/11? I beg to differ. You want it to say that, but said that before that date nobody believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. You wish it to be a link, then, by all means, you do so. I won't, and I never did.
 
flavio said:
In making its case for the war with Iraq, do you think members of the Bush Administration intentionally misled the public or not?
Click to expand...


Interesting question, but it fails in two aspects for here. One, it asks an opinion, not a fact. Two, see my thread about the guy trying to return an Xbox 360. Same deal. HE made a bad decision, and is now trying to foist the blame off on others. Your question is tailor made for that type of exploitation.
 
rrfield said:
You can lead a horse to water...
Click to expand...

Ahh...condescension...the very thing you accuse me of. Very original. Did you think of that yourself, or did you have some friends over to help you?

Now...Perhaps you can show me where Bush says that 9/11 is one of the reasons for going to Iraq, and not an assumption upon your part that that's what you think he meant.
 
Ya know it is very funny.
Or rather odd?
How some people can hear what our great
Preisdent said in the days and weeks following the
attacks on American soil that resulted in the deaths of over 2,800 innocent souls
and not hear what he said?

"yer either with U.S. or
'yer either with the terrorists"
 
So does that mean yous guys are on the side of the Terrorists?

Just like yous were on the side of the Vietcong in the 60’s?

It isn’t a coincidence that you ran Kerry!
 
No, I read that. I can read & decipher liberal opinion pieces. None of that is important when 70% say life is good. Especially when that figure is presented by a left loving poll group like Time magazine & reported by a decidely leftist group like ABC. Shit, I'll bet you can find 46% to say life was better in the US before the war. :rolleyes:

They're voting, much to your chagrin.
 
Gonz said:
No, I read that. I can read & decipher liberal opinion pieces. None of that is important when 70% say life is good. Especially when that figure is presented by a left loving poll group like Time magazine & reported by a decidely leftist group like ABC. Shit, I'll bet you can find 46% to say life was better in the US before the war. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Just can't take it when a right loving poll group trounces your point? Fewer than half, 46 percent, say the country is better off now than it was before the war matters far more than your stat.

I'll bet you can find 70% that say life is good in the US.
 
flavio said:
Just can't take it when a right loving poll group trounces your point? Fewer than half, 46 percent, say the country is better off now than it was before the war matters far more than your stat.

I'll bet you can find 70% that say life is good in the US.
Click to expand...

And that's the whole point...You take a poll in Beverly Hills, the outcome of those same questions will be quite different than the same poll in Harlem, NY. One day, you'll learn this. Too bad it's taking so long...
 
Gato_Solo said:
And that's the whole point...You take a poll in Beverly Hills, the outcome of those same questions will be quite different than the same poll in Harlem, NY. One day, you'll learn this. Too bad it's taking so long...
Click to expand...
Obviously "life is good" will get different results in Harlem vs. Beverly Hills. But asking Iraqis if he country is better off now than it was before the war is pretty telling.

Someday maybe you'll learn something.
 
flavio said:
Obviously "life is good" will get different results in Harlem vs. Beverly Hills. But asking Iraqis if he country is better off now than it was before the war is pretty telling.

Someday maybe you'll learn something.
Click to expand...

You clearly have no clue, do you? If you take that question, and only ask it in the Kurdish areas, you'll hear nothing but praise. Ask it in Fallujah, and you may get shot as an American before your question is complete. It's the same thing as Harlem and Beverly Hills.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top