Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Where are they, Mr. President? (Buchanan about no WMD found so far in Iraq)
WorldNetDaily ^ | Patrick J Buchanan

Posted on 05/07/2003 7:15:56 PM PDT by FairOpinion

After each war, historians sift through the record to discern its real causes. Invariably, they divide into two camps: the court historians who defend the war leaders and the revisionists who prosecute them before the bar of history.

After World War II, the evidence that FDR had steered us into war, while asserting he was doing his best to avert war, was so massive even his court historians admit he lied. Wrote Thomas A. Bailey in FDR's defense, "He was like the physician who must tell the patient lies for his own good."

Roosevelt had cut off Japan's oil, sent the Flying Tigers to China and sought to tempt Japan into attacking a line of picket ships. He had lied about German subs torpedoing U.S. destroyers and Nazi plans to conquer South America and replace the Christian cross with the swastika. This mattered in 1950. For, with Stalin triumphant in Europe and China, it appeared – in Churchill's phrase – that we "had killed the wrong pig."

But today, with the immense focus on the Holocaust, the question is no longer, "Did FDR lie?" But, "Why did we not declare war sooner?"

Vietnam was, in Reagan's phrase, "a noble cause." But because it was a lost cause, it is now said and believed we only went to war because LBJ had misled us about the Tonkin Gulf incident.

The war in Iraq is being portrayed by the president's men as a just and necessary war that removed a mortal peril. But if our victory turns to ashes in our mouths, and we discover that we have inherited our own West Bank in Mesopotamia, the White House will have to explain again why we went there.

In his speech from the deck of the Abraham Lincoln, President Bush told the nation, "With those attacks (of 9-11), the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States. And war is what they got" – i.e., the invasion of Iraq was payback for the killers of Sept. 11.

But is this the truth? For this war on Iraq was not sold to the nation as retribution for 9-11. Indeed, the ties between Iraqi intelligence and the al-Qaida killers turned out to be bogus War Party propaganda.

We were told, rather, that Saddam had gas and germ weapons and was working on nuclear weapons. And once he had them, he would use them on us, or give them to Osama. "Do you want to wait for a nuclear 9-11?" Americans were asked.

Trusting the president, believing that he had information we did not, a majority of Americans approved of pre-emptive war. But where, now, are the thousands of artillery warheads and terror weapons the president and secretary of state told us Saddam had?

We have scoured Iraq for a month. No Scuds have been found. No chemical or biological weapons. No laboratories or production lines. No evidence that Iraq was building nukes or seeking fissile material.

"Every statement I make today is backed up by ... solid sources," Colin Powell told the United Nations. But since then, his case has crumbled. Were he a district attorney, Colin Powell would be under investigation today for prosecutorial incompetence or possible fraud. One British document he relied on turned out to be a 10-year-old term paper by a graduate student. The documents from Niger proving Iraq was seeking "yellowcake" for nuclear bombs turned out to be forgeries – and crude ones at that.

Who forged them? Why have we not been told? Does the secretary who put his integrity on the line not want to know?

If our occupation of Iraq turns sour and U.S. troops are being shot in the back, a year from now, Americans are going to demand to know. And President Bush could face the charge thrown up in the face of FDR by Clare Boothe Luce, that he "lied us into war."

Both the president and Powell are honorable men. If they misled us, surely it is because they themselves were misled. It is impossible to believe either man would deliberately state as fact what he knew to be false. But the president must find these weapons – or find the men who told him, with such certitude, that Iraq had them.

For there is something strange here. If Saddam had these weapons, why did he not surrender them to save himself? If he did not give them up because he intended to use them on us, why did he not use them on us? And if they were destroyed before the war, why did he not simply show us where, and thereby save himself, his family and his regime?

Last fall, Congress abdicated, surrendered its war-making power to a president who demanded that Congress yield it up. If Congress wishes to redeem itself, it should unearth the truth about why we went to war. Was the official explanation the truth, or was it political cover for an American imperial war?


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Israel; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: buchanan; destruction; finos; iraq; israel; mass; patbuchanan; patrickjbuchanan; patwasright; pitchforkpat; randsconcerntrolls; waronterror; weapons; wmd
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-243 next last
If there are still any Buchanan supporters left around here, hopefully this article will cure them.

Who is writing Buchanan's articles, Robert Byrd or Tommy Daschle, or little scribes from DU perhaps?

Maybe those Gore voters in Florida who voted for Buchanan knew something we didn't.

1 posted on 05/07/2003 7:15:56 PM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Yep, I think this just about seals the case against Buchanan, if it needed to still be sealed. He has come full circle to being basically just another anti-American whiner. Sad to witness his slow meltdown.
2 posted on 05/07/2003 7:20:02 PM PDT by speedy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
While I have to admit that he's consist, he's not as accurate as a German made clock. Sure, he goes coo-coo regularly, but not with timed precision.

I guess he's an irregular coo-coo.

3 posted on 05/07/2003 7:20:02 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion; ex-snook; Pelham
Last fall, Congress abdicated, surrendered its war making power to a president who demanded that Congress yield it up. If Congress wishes to redeem itself, it should unearth the truth about why we went to war. Was the official explanation the truth, or was it political cover for an American imperial war?

Thank God Almighty this man is outside the Republican Party.

He'll never be a political threat, ever again.

4 posted on 05/07/2003 7:20:53 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
How long before one of the diehard Patsies is on the thread complaining about people taking shots are pat but not disputing his facts (of course anything that pat assumes, presumes or utters is fact)?
5 posted on 05/07/2003 7:23:21 PM PDT by CWOJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Maybe those Gore voters in Florida who voted for Buchanan knew something we didn't.

Good point! Does make you wonder!

6 posted on 05/07/2003 7:24:48 PM PDT by PhiKapMom (Get the US out of the UN and the UN out of the US)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Thank God Almighty this man is outside the Republican Party.

AMEN !!! At the rate he's going, he may be better off "outside" the country too.

7 posted on 05/07/2003 7:25:10 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis (Trying hard to make it to the top spot on Tagbad Todd's "Top Ten List" -Taggie's a liar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: speedy
I can't figure him out. Sunday on McLaughlin he was praising the heck out of GWB and now he's sticking him. He praised Bush and said how proud he was of him on the USS A. Lincoln.

Now, this crap...split personality or something...
8 posted on 05/07/2003 7:26:04 PM PDT by freedombrigade (In Hoc Signo Vinces)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
If there are still any Buchanan supporters left around here, hopefully this article will cure them.

Yep. One real test for Buchanan will come when the adminstration does get to the point, later this year, of describing all the WMD it has and will find in Iraq. The real lefties will be screaming that Bush & Company planted the evidence. Buchanan will seemingly have to say, yes, I was wrong about the WMD, or he will have to say, yes, I was wrong about Bush and Powell being honorable men.

9 posted on 05/07/2003 7:26:22 PM PDT by Steve Eisenberg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Dear Dimbulb:

We still have FOUR CONTESTANTS left on American Idol.

Try to be a little patient.

10 posted on 05/07/2003 7:26:55 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Wow... Pat has really taken a turn for the worse. Sad to see it happen to him but glad he is not a credible political force anymore.
11 posted on 05/07/2003 7:27:21 PM PDT by jokemoke
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
The man is bound and determined to be thought of and made a fool.

So be it.

12 posted on 05/07/2003 7:27:31 PM PDT by jwalsh07
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Why does the media still consider him credible? And his sister is still a pundit...enough! when are pundits put out to pasture?
13 posted on 05/07/2003 7:27:40 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
What is Pat? (SNL)

FMCDH

14 posted on 05/07/2003 7:28:09 PM PDT by nothingnew
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: jwalsh07; woofie
Has anybody besides me noticed that it's those outside the loop -- Newt, Pat, Dobson, etc. -- who are writing all this crap?
15 posted on 05/07/2003 7:29:14 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Sinkspur wrote: Thank God Almighty this man is outside the Republican Party.

I believe that a year or so ago Buchanan anounced that he was a Republican again.

16 posted on 05/07/2003 7:29:30 PM PDT by quidnunc (Omnis Gaul delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
I barely could glance at this. For a man I used to admire, Pat Buchanan has become a real POS.
17 posted on 05/07/2003 7:29:57 PM PDT by doug from upland (my dogs ran from the room when they heard Hillary shrieking on the radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Blah, Blah, Blah, Filty Jews, Blah, Blah, Blah
18 posted on 05/07/2003 7:30:14 PM PDT by Redleg Duke (Stir the pot...don't let anything settle to the bottom where the lawyers can feed off of it!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson
Pat Buchanan has reached rock bottom and showing signs of digging

This guy has gotten so bitter and negative that he is much like that whiney little puke Paul Begala

19 posted on 05/07/2003 7:30:21 PM PDT by MJY1288 (Freedom is Ringing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: freedombrigade
He's actually being consistent here. His complaint is not so much about Bush himself, but about those people in the Bush administration who have abeen advocates for war against Iraq regardless of the WMD issue.

I'm no big fan of Pat Buchanan, but I do know this -- if Bill Clinton had pursued military action against Iraq on the basis of Iraq's "weapons of mass destruction program," there would be a lot of people here on FR demanding an answer when these weapons were never found.

20 posted on 05/07/2003 7:30:32 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Redleg Duke
LOL!
21 posted on 05/07/2003 7:30:51 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Victoria Delsoul
Pat Buchanan bump.
22 posted on 05/07/2003 7:31:13 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Many years ago I thought Buchanan was good on some issues. Although, I always found him unsuitable for the Presidency for many reasons, not the least of which was because he'd never held any elected office.

But he's getting loopier by the word, and he is as hard on the eyes as a person can be. Although he's a pretty smart guy, he thinks he's smarter and better than he really is. Way too much ego, and not enough common sense.

23 posted on 05/07/2003 7:31:24 PM PDT by AlbionGirl (A kite flies highest against the wind, not with it. - Winston Churchill)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: doug from upland
Suffice it to say, YOU have grown as a person, while Pat has regressed.
24 posted on 05/07/2003 7:31:37 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Dear Pat,
What if we never find WMDs? You want that we should put Saddam Hussein back in power?
Love,
Tex
25 posted on 05/07/2003 7:32:06 PM PDT by Texas Eagle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc
We voted him OFF the party!
26 posted on 05/07/2003 7:32:11 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: CWOJackson

Wild Pat... Walkin' Tall

Ho hum............
27 posted on 05/07/2003 7:32:28 PM PDT by deport (Beware of Idiots bearing gifts.... One maybe the FR Joke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
AMEN !!! At the rate he's going, he may be better off "outside" the country too.

Maybe he should go to France. He's anti-Israel, pro-saddam, and his articles are just about as funny as a Jerry Lewis movie.

He'd probably be welcomed with open arms.

28 posted on 05/07/2003 7:32:42 PM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
if Bill Clinton had pursued military action against Iraq on the basis of Iraq's "weapons of mass destruction program," there would be a lot of people here on FR demanding an answer when these weapons were never found.

Not if there had been a 9-11.

29 posted on 05/07/2003 7:33:23 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Steve Eisenberg
"he will have to say, yes, I was wrong about Bush and Powell being honorable men."
---


But for him to imply now that they aren't, is disgraceful -- for Buchanan.
30 posted on 05/07/2003 7:33:56 PM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Has anybody besides me noticed that it's those outside the loop -- Newt, Pat, Dobson, etc. -- who are writing all this crap?

Yep.......all men, clearly envious of the amazingly positive and commanding image of George Bush that pleased many, many people.

........and to think they call women "catty".

31 posted on 05/07/2003 7:33:58 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis (Trying hard to make it to the top spot on Tagbad Todd's "Top Ten List" -Taggie's a liar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Dane
He'd probably be welcomed with open arms.

LOL.......and a bottle of their best non-selling champagne. ; *)

32 posted on 05/07/2003 7:35:27 PM PDT by Southflanknorthpawsis (Trying hard to make it to the top spot on Tagbad Todd's "Top Ten List" -Taggie's a liar)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis; Howlin
Has anybody besides me noticed that it's those outside the loop -- Newt, Pat, Dobson, etc. -- who are writing all this crap?


Don't forget that ol' boy from the FL swamps......... Chuck something or other.
33 posted on 05/07/2003 7:35:33 PM PDT by deport (Beware of Idiots bearing gifts.... One maybe the FR Joke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Don't put Newt in the same category.

Newt, while critical, he was careful not to criticize Bush, OR Powell, specifically tried to discuss the problems at State as non-personality related, and brought up that he, Newt commissioned the Hart-Rudman report, which had the same recommendations about the State Dept.

Buchanan, on the other hand is basically calling Bush a liar, because here we are a few weeks after the war and we didn't serve up some WMD on a silver platter to Pat.
34 posted on 05/07/2003 7:37:25 PM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: AlbionGirl
I personally feel he is just using his position to take advantage of the Libertarians. This guy raked in millions while he was destroying that party. His whole family was on the payroll and probably his dog if he could of pulled it off.

I don't think he ever had any intensions of making a real to run for the presidency. I truly believe he has become a fraud. he knows he doesn't have a sowballs chance in hell of becoming the President and exploits those who are foolish enough to send him campaign donations. Harry Browne is no different. The two of them only take one view on the issues......... THE NEGATIVE ONE

35 posted on 05/07/2003 7:37:44 PM PDT by MJY1288 (Freedom is Ringing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
Who lied to the President and Powell. I know... must have been the JOOOOOOOOOOOOS.

Pat Buchanan, have a quarter, call somebody who gives a crap.

36 posted on 05/07/2003 7:38:09 PM PDT by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Maybe somebody should tell Pat about that poll taken a few weeks ago stating that 75% of the American public still supported the war even if there were NO WMD.
Apparently he missed it.
37 posted on 05/07/2003 7:38:16 PM PDT by truthkeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: deport
Patrick J Buchanan

What does the J stand for?
38 posted on 05/07/2003 7:38:34 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: woofie
Ummm...two syllables, rights?
39 posted on 05/07/2003 7:39:35 PM PDT by truthkeeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Yes, I have, and that is why Mrs. DFU has put me on a diet. :)
40 posted on 05/07/2003 7:40:29 PM PDT by doug from upland (my dogs ran from the room when they heard Hillary shrieking on the radio)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: woofie
It sure as hell isn't Joshua :-)

I believe it's Joseph

41 posted on 05/07/2003 7:40:31 PM PDT by MJY1288 (Freedom is Ringing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: woofie
What does the J stand for?

Jackass?

42 posted on 05/07/2003 7:41:01 PM PDT by dogbyte12
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Howlin wrote: We voted him OFF the party!

Taliban Pat is to the Republican Party like Lyndon La Rouche is to the Democrats.

43 posted on 05/07/2003 7:41:39 PM PDT by quidnunc (Omnis Gaul delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: woofie
Patrick J Buchanan

What does the J stand for?
----


Jerk?
44 posted on 05/07/2003 7:41:53 PM PDT by FairOpinion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Yep, it can't be too long now before gerald ford pecks out his predictable NYTimes opinion piece on abortion, the Iraq War, abortion, President Bush, abortion, and did he mention yet he was pro-choice when it comes to abortion.

Whatever happened to enjoying life and just taking it easy when the spotlight no longer blinds your sight? Whatever happened to don't call us, we'll call you? It's kinda hard for conservatives to complain about clinton's pie-hole whenever we've got a few of our own.

45 posted on 05/07/2003 7:42:08 PM PDT by small voice in the wilderness
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: dogbyte12
Jackass?

Wasnt that a movie?
46 posted on 05/07/2003 7:42:21 PM PDT by woofie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Alberta's Child
Looks like Pat is in tremendous need for free publicity. However, as a Akhenaton well said, "Put a bridle on thy tongue; set a guard before thy lips, lest the words of thine own mouth destroy thy peace...On much speaking cometh repentance, but in silence is safety."
47 posted on 05/07/2003 7:43:14 PM PDT by Victoria Delsoul
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Not if there had been a 9-11.

I'll bet there still would have been a lot of complaints here, unless a link between Iraq and 9/11 had been clearly established.

48 posted on 05/07/2003 7:43:31 PM PDT by Alberta's Child
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Southflanknorthpawsis
LOL.......and a bottle of their best non-selling champagne. ; *)

The only thing is though if Pat would move to France, I think under their law he would have to frenchify his first name. What is french for Patrick, Patrice?

49 posted on 05/07/2003 7:43:33 PM PDT by Dane
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: FairOpinion
I believe the Bush administration already has a cache of WMD captured from Iraq.

I believe they will wait until the cache is very large, and then they will reveal it.

50 posted on 05/07/2003 7:44:06 PM PDT by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-100101-150151-200201-243 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson