Replies

Maybe this will soothe you during your withdrawal stages,s.o.l.; we all want the best for you...

.......................................................

It’s become de rigueur to deride Bush’s “failed” policies in Iraq. No one speaks well of them — except, maybe, Iraqis.

But here are the facts, stark as they are: During his vicious 20-year reign, Saddam Hussein — remember him? — killed an estimated 5% of Iraq’s population. That works out to about 5,000 people a month slaughtered by the regime.

You might disagree that Bush was right to depose this murderous thug. But in doing so, you would then have to defend the deaths of thousands of innocents.

For those who say Bush went to war in Iraq under false pretenses — you know, “Bush lied, people died” — there’s this: He made a lengthy, nuanced defense of his decision to get rid of Saddam. It was reflected in Congress’ own resolution in late 2002, which cited 23 reasons for removing Saddam from power.

The ideas that it was all about oil or that Congress was bamboozled on WMD are both false.

Bush, Congress and our foreign allies all saw the same intelligence, and all came to the same conclusion: Saddam had a nuclear weapons program, and intended to build one as soon as he was able. That was, and remained, true.

After being bashed relentlessly in the media and on the campaign trail, President Bush left the White House with his approval ratings low and little, except his dignity, intact.

If he is to have a Truman-like reprieve in the public eye, it will surely come as we all start to realize that on Iraq, contrary to popular and elite opinion, Bush got it right. Mission accomplished.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=322096047909804

Fight the urge to Bash Bush, s.o.l.; I know you’ve got it in you. We’re pulling for you......

RE “ But here are the facts, stark as they are: During his vicious 20-year reign, Saddam Hussein — remember him? — killed an estimated 5% of Iraq’s population. That works out to about 5,000 people a month slaughtered by the regime.You might disagree that Bush was right to depose this murderous thug. But in doing so, you would then have to defend the deaths of thousands of innocents”

LOL. Nice try. the problem was GWB didnt sell the public on a humanitarian mission, he sold them on WMDs and “Mushroom Clouds” . But let's play your game. If Iraq was so critical to something, than why didnt GWB enact an Iraq tax? All you Neo-cons would have been glad to pay more taxes to save all those lives (or whatever). But No! Your moral outrage went more like “This war is critical, but I am not paying for it. I want a tax cut. Let someone elses kids pay for it. But I get to take moral credit for supporting it. A true Great American who cares!” . GWB didnt fund the Iraq war with an Iraq tax because he would have lost the election in 2004. Moral my a...

I’m curious, where does the Constitution for the United States authorize a president, who is chief of government FOR THIS NATION and not the whole world, to undertake a war in order to depose someone because he’s mean to the people in THAT country? I’m serious here, I can’t find that authority ANYWHERE in my copy. And that pesky Tenth Amendment (which is gaining a resurgence now) says that if the authority isn’t specified, IT DOES NOT EXIST. So please be specific. Thanks in advance.