Officials inside government and advisers outside told ABCNEWS the administration emphasized the danger of Saddam's weapons to gain the legal justification for war from the United Nations and to stress the danger at home to Americans. "We were not lying," said one official. "But it was just a matter of emphasis."
The Bush administration wanted to make a statement about its determination to fight terrorism. And officials acknowledge that Saddam had all the requirements to make him, from their standpoint, the perfect target.
Other countries have such weapons, yet the United States did not go to war with them. And though Saddam oppressed and tortured his own people, other tyrants have done the same without incurring U.S. military action. Finally, Saddam had ties to terrorists — but so have several countries that the United States did not fight.
But Saddam was guilty of all these things and he met another requirement as well — a prime location, in the heart of the Middle East, between Syria and Iran, two countries the United States wanted to send a message to.
So it wasn't about "imminent danger" and "national security" and "weapons of mass destruction" after all... but about "sending a message?"
If the Democrats and the media don't know what to do with this, they don't deserve their jobs. Ye gods.
"You may be wondering why I have been making so many references lately to Fox News. The reason is that it is now my cable news network of choice -- because if I’m going to watch the news and be lied to, I want it to be ridiculously obvious that I am being lied to." -- Center for an Informed America, Newsletter #34
Originally posted by vspIf the Democrats and the media don't know what to do with this, they don't deserve their jobs. Ye gods.
And I think we all know that they won't.
Because I haven't heard ANYONE suggest that this war was about pressuring North Korea. Certainly no one has raised the idea that this war is part of a larger plan (or "conspiracy") to democratize the Middle East. Nope. Pretty much everyone is swallowing the White House line.
"May God bless our country and all who defend her."
Originally posted by PalpatineWBecause I haven't heard ANYONE suggest that this war was about pressuring North Korea. Certainly no one has raised the idea that this war is part of a larger plan (or "conspiracy") to democratize the Middle East. Nope. Pretty much everyone is swallowing the White House line.
The Middle East isn't ours to democratize, last I checked.
"You may be wondering why I have been making so many references lately to Fox News. The reason is that it is now my cable news network of choice -- because if I’m going to watch the news and be lied to, I want it to be ridiculously obvious that I am being lied to." -- Center for an Informed America, Newsletter #34
My point was not to address the merits of democratizing the Middle East; only to point out that the Dems and the media DO know what to do with it, and they are doing it.
However, that attitude will get you nowhere. Are children ours to educate? Are prisoners ours to incarcerate? I can appreciate a healthy dose of isolationism (though I suspect this is not isolationism on your part), but no one has yet convinced me that we can co-exist with Islamofascism.
"May God bless our country and all who defend her."
but no one has yet convinced me that we can co-exist with Islamofascism.
The hardcore medieval Islamists talk a good game, but they're generally too realistic to initiate a fight - unless they feel they've been attacked, and then they fight to the bitter death. Al-Qaeda exists primarily because of Arabs who view the US troop presence in Saudi Arabia as a hostile occupation.
It's also worth noting that democracy doesn't have to be forced on an Islamic state - look at Malaysia, or indeed even Iran.
Originally posted by godkingAl-Qaeda exists primarily because of Arabs who view the US troop presence in Saudi Arabia as a hostile occupation.
But having US Troops in Saudi Arabia IS and should be considered a hostile occupation. What business do our troops have there, seeing as Saudi Arabia is NOT US property? Do you want foreign troops to come in our country with thier guns strapped to thier shoulders and what not.
And also, democracy will NOT work for everyone you know. There are some cultures that shouldn't or couldn't take care of themselves or make the right decisions. Some people need a dictator to tell them when to eat or sleep, or what to watch or listen to.
(edited by Cerebus on 26.4.03 1054) Cerebus: Barbarian, Prime Minister, Pope, Perfect House Guest.
"Graft is as necessary as throwing up when you drink too much."
Ummm- I dont think it is an occupation if we are INVITED to be there. The Saudi government invited us to have a base there. It is not like we just went in and took it by force...
Hostile- not hostile, because our troops there are not agressive towards the Saudis.
Occupation- Not an occupation, since our troops are confined to an area by the Saudi government- we certainly are not occupying anything.
If you want to OPPOSE our stationing troops in the region, that is one this, but resorting to out and out ignorance to make a point really does not help your point...
Right, but we weren't invited by the saudi people, they obviously do NOT want us there. Thier government is why we're there. It's like if G.W. goes and lets ruskies set up in Alaska, you know we ain't gonna like that, right?
Cerebus: Barbarian, Prime Minister, Pope, Perfect House Guest.
"Graft is as necessary as throwing up when you drink too much."
Right, but we weren't invited by the saudi people, they obviously do NOT want us there. Thier government is why we're there.
Wait a minute. But I though...
And also, democracy will NOT work for everyone you know. There are some cultures that shouldn't or couldn't take care of themselves or make the right decisions. Some people need a dictator to tell them when to eat or sleep, or what to watch or listen to.
Last time I checked, the government carrying out the will of the people was kind of the definition of Democracy.
"I'm sorry, I didn't think I was going to talk about 'man on dog' with a United States senator. It's sort of freaking me out."
Associated Press interview with Senator Rick Santorum (R-PA), 04-07-2003.
Ok... you got me. I feel that there shouldn't be strong governments and that we should all live under anarky rules. Governments are the reason we are all in the predicaments that we're in right now. At the most, I think we should have a parlimental type government where the people vote blindly for representatives who are listed on ballots by number, not by there name. Or, even better, have a national lottery where everyone gets automaticly entered into the running. Then, this 'governing body' will make up laws for the people to vote on.
Cerebus: Barbarian, Prime Minister, Pope, Perfect House Guest.
"Graft is as necessary as throwing up when you drink too much."
Originally posted in two different messages by Cerebus...democracy will NOT work for everyone you know. There are some cultures that shouldn't or couldn't take care of themselves or make the right decisions. Some people need a dictator to tell them when to eat or sleep, or what to watch or listen to.
I feel that there shouldn't be strong governments and that we should all live under anarky rules. Governments are the reason we are all in the predicaments that we're in right now. At the most, I think we should have a parlimental type government where the people vote blindly for representatives who are listed on ballots by number, not by there name. Or, even better, have a national lottery where everyone gets automaticly entered into the running. Then, this 'governing body' will make up laws for the people to vote on.
Hey buddy... I'll have you know I voted for Perot even AFTER seeing Stockdale during that 'debate'. Yes, I even still have a bumper sticker stating so...
Good grief I suck...
Cerebus: Barbarian, Prime Minister, Pope, Perfect House Guest.
"Graft is as necessary as throwing up when you drink too much."