I find it highly ironic to see someone who was beating the drum for war, saying that we couldn't take the time for the UN to do its job, flip-flop and say that it's just a matter of time.
The problem with the "matter of time" excuse is that it belies the Bush administration's claim that they knew 100% for sure that Iraq had WMD, and knew exactly where the are. We all saw the pictures. If there really was a cache of WMD, wouldn't that be the first thing that our troops would secure? The fact that it's been two whole months, and the alleged "smoking gun" has not been revealed, means that there is no smoking gun. They're going on a fishing trip. I'm sure they'll "find" something eventually. But since we were lied to once, how do we know that it wasn't just planted there?
Sorry SNL but you are once again wrong in your assumptions. We have already uncovered evidence of WMD that has been sent for further analysis. We have scientists and students that are coming forth and telling us that they were ordered to destroy and hide their work from the UN inspectors...evidence Iraq had spies in the UN inspection teams. I am not flip-flopping my position at all...it has stayed the same since day 1 and continues to be that way. Now that the US is in control of Iraq the iminent threat is no longer.
Not since the Clinton administration have we been lied to by a President...but good try on the conspiracy theory. Try getting someone of real inteligence to believe it.
I failed? Try again. I haven't been asked to acknowledge anything, and since the topic of this thread is the same as what I did talk about, I'm not concealing anything. I think by this time you know why you're resorting to the ad-hom attacks. You're wrong, but will not admit it.
When you said...
That "smoking gun" excuse was used to justify the war.
You were trying to impress upon the masses that this was the one and only justification for war. I simply pointed out to you that you failed to mention the other, equally important, reasons. Yup...you are wrong yet again.
Yes, there is a HUGE difference. Republican members of Congress made allegations against Clinton that they failed to prove, so they entrapped him, using evidence obtained through criminal means. So yes, Clinton crossed the line between self-defense, which every American citizen has a right to, and telling a slight falsehood about his personal life, which Congress has no right to meddle into in the first place. Bush lied outright in pursuit of his war agenda. People died as a result of what Bush did.
There is a HUGE difference between Clinton and Bush and their actions in office. You have posted more lies in your above statement. There was no GOP entrapment! President Clinton got on national TV, waved his finger at the American people and said "I did not have sexual relations with that woman." That was one of the most blatant lies directly at the American people. He further lied in his sworn depostions to Congress. Basically he lied under oath! President Clinton dug his own grave and was made to lie in it. So show me where, outside of your own conspiracy theories and 1/2 truths that Bush lied to anyone. And you need to go beyond the whole argument that you do not like the man or his decisions. Those are not reasons to accuse someone of lying...otherwise you would be in a fascist state. Remember other people outside the Bush administration agreed with him...like I said both the House and Senate intellegence committees.
So you say. I have evidence to the contrary.
Lets here this evidence. But it has to be something substantial. Conspiracy theories, left wing propaganda, lies, false accusations, and 1/2 truths will not hold water.