Bush insists Iran still a threat and he's not 'dispirited'

So why are we building a missile shield in Eastern Europe to protect against missiles Iran does not have carrying a nuclear weapon that Iran is not even working on?

Why is Mr. Fiscal Conservative spending billions on a threat that is not only non-existent now, but that we have no reason to believe is getting any closer to existence?

I'm pretty disgusted with the press right now. Bush stood up there and lied to them again today, and not one of them calls him out over the constant lying.

President Bush is right. Any country with nuclear or missile capability is a continuing threat that must be watched, just as any thug on the street must be watched. There is no single front in this war and America's security shield must be everywhere. The Left moans about the cost but they forget the hundreds of billions that the 9-11 attack inflicted on our nation. The cost of defense is high; the cost of cowering is much higher.

The President is right Iran is a worldwide threat especially to Israel and the USA if it keeps enriching uranium and gets a nuclear weapon. Bush is right they had a covert program means than get one going again.
Mahmoud is the worse man on planet earth. Jerry White, Springfield, IL

They stopped in 2003?
Gee, what else happend in 2003?

Oh, sorry....back to drinking kool aid.....it was all those strongly worded letters from the UN that caused them to stop.

If this Christian Compassionate Conservative is not dispirited over lying this country into the Iraq war which has caused the deaths of 4,000 American soldiers,maimed 30,000,and wasted 800 billion of our tax dollars,increased our debt by 5 trillion,is certainly not going to get dispirited by lying about Iran.

Our intelligence is severely deficient. They're probably wrong about this as well. That being said, I don't think we should worry about Iran. We just tell them if they want to guarantee their destruction and hand their oil over to the U.S., then they should fire off a Nuke. Their choice.

BTW, Luke, the missile SHIELDS are in Europe to protect allies such as Poland and Checkoslovakia against Russian aggression.

"Any country with nuclear or missile capability is a continuing threat that must be watched, just as any thug on the street must be watched."

Geraldine, does this apply to the United States since we have nuclear missiles? I bet you do not remember which country actually hase used nuclear weapons.

Cheryl,

I agree with you about the media.

I love the right's portrayal of the media as being liberal biased. What a crock. They're not biased except for simply reporting whatever is being said. When was the last time that any news organization actually came out and said that what the administration is saying is total nonsense?

The administration seems to feel that as long as they can continue sell this story of fear, they are going to be allowed to do anything that they want? How many times, right before crucial votes have we seen some type of "terrorist alert" only to see the alert be discounted after they got what they want?

How long is the American public going to be manipulated by these folks?

"Any country with nuclear or missile capability is a continuing threat that must be watched, just as any thug on the street must be watched."

An empire internationally and a police state internally. Is that what Republicans stand for?

Loon, Lay off the acid, would you? Close your curtains so the helicopters won't be able to see in.

In the news the DNC Swamp won't report, Israeli intelligence says that Iran has restarted its nuclear weapons program. See
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1195546799748&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

"BUSH SPEAKS" MARK SILVA GETS TWO QUESTIONS BUT WITH THE SAME ANSWER"

NO I'M NOT SWEATING, NO I'M TALKING IN THIS LOW UNDERTONE VOICE BECAUSE I'VE JUST BEEN MADE A LIAR AGAIN. NO I'M NOT WORRIED THAT IN 2004, 2005, 2006 AND RIGHT UP TO THE ELECTIONS BOMB BOMB IRAN WASN'T MY SONG. THAT WAS JOHN MCCAIN.

BLACKWATER IS THE BLAME, THE INSPECTORS ARE TO BLAME, THE CIA IS TO BLAME. DAVID ADDINGTON IS TO BLAME, NO VALERIE PLAME IS THE BLAME!

PLAME BLAME, PLAME BLAME, SHE DID IT, IT'S HER REPORT.

BTW, Luke, the missile SHIELDS are in Europe to protect allies such as Poland and Checkoslovakia against Russian aggression.

Posted by: RCK | December 4, 2007 12:14 PM

Well, first off RCK, get up to date. There is nolonger a nation of Czechoslovakia hasn't existed since 1992. It split into the Cech republic and Slovakia.

As to the purpose of the shields, your saying then that the Bush Adminstration has been lying to the international community, and the citzens of the United States when he says that the shields are NOT to defend against Russia?

http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/04/26/news/nato.php

"The idea that somehow 10 interceptors and a few radars in Eastern Europe are going to threaten the Soviet strategic deterrent is purely ludicrous, and everybody knows it," Rice said in Oslo before a meeting of NATO foreign ministers expected to focus on the missile defense dispute.

"The Russians have thousands of warheads," Rice said. "The idea that you can somehow stop the Soviet strategic nuclear deterrent with a few interceptors just doesn't make sense."

Was Charles Manson dispirited when he was busted in a web of lies, deceit and murder?

What we have here is just another horrible example of Bush's dishonesty, this time revealed before he does any more harm.

He started a terrible war before, knowing full well the facts of Iraq's weapons status. He used and abused the Director of CIA as well as others in carrying out his obsession.

He has been lying through his teeth about Iran.
If anybody believes the cover story that this estimate is brand new, he or she should contact me about a bridge I want to sell.

The President is given weekly intelligence estimates, along with periodic priority updates as required. Would Americans want it to be any other way?

I think what we have here is the intelligence community trying to prevent another disaster. Many in the military and intelligence community understand the truth about Bush.

They understand what a strategic blunder Iraq was, and they understand how stretched their forces are.

There are stories that a number of senior military officers are prepared to tender their resignations should Bush attack Iran.

This man is a narcissistic liar, one of the key requirements for a psychopath, who believes only his inner voice, regarding the thoughts of others as meaningless.

sixteen U.S. Intel. AGS. sent secret memo to 'W'; last week; "Blue skys clearin put on Irans new face;" Secret squirrel whispers into modified soup can sequested from Kennebunk cottage."Mr. P the IAEA is not the song we sang at campfires with uncle Walworth the US diplomat to Israel responsible for shielding the Dimona; 'Nukey make nice' program from your eyes on canoe trips.

Brucie:

I read the article from The Jerusalem Post that you cite.

NOWHERE IN THAT ARTICLE DOES IT SAY THAT THE IRANIANS HAVE RESTARTED THEIR NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM!!!!!

Stop reading between the lines.

My apologies Luke. You're right. The missile shields are in Slovakia, Poland, etc. so they can be converted into missiles and lobbed at Iran. Pretty sound logistical planning.

You people don't believe anything Bush and Condy say, so why are you quoting them as gospel to me? Typical liberal Deutshe Bank.

Hey what a shock, Bruce is outright lying again. The article he links to in no ways says "Israeli intelligence says that Iran has restarted its nuclear weapons program."

From the article:

"National Infrastructures Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer said that irrespective of the US intelligence report, "Israel must continue to act in every way against the Iranian nuclear threat."

"This report is totally fine, it makes me smile, but on the other hand Israel and the defense establishment are working under the premise that Iran is in fact heading directly towards [a nuclear weapon]" Ben Eliezer told Army Radio, adding, "This is exactly one of the issues over which the state of Israel must take no risk."

There is no mention what so ever of Israeli intelligence disagreeing with the NIE or finding that Iran has restarted it's program.

When confronted with facts Bruce resorts to lies and disinformation. You should be ashamed Bruce.

Bush looked like a deer caught in headlights today.

Looks like the jig is up, hopefully gitmo orange is on Santa's list for these war criminals

VOTE RON PAUL 2008

Join the largest grassroots political movement in modern history!

The Revolution is NOW!

Yo Chuckman, if the U.S. intelligence community is falsely stating that Iran has no nuclear weapons to keep Bush from bombing Iran, thereby putting the US in a vulnerable position to be attacked,... then we need to send our entire intelligence apparatus to Canada and start over.

SOme serious Bush hatin' spinning going on here!

Lets get some perspective here...

1. There is no doubt that Iran had an active Nuke program as recently as 2003.

2. Iran already has the ballistic missles to deliver a nuke - if available- to almost any of it's mideast neighbors, and more importantly, to Israel.

3. Iran is enriching Uranium now.

So all that is left for Iran to be a nuke power is to have enough weapons grade nuke material or to have access to an already made nuke..

Did I miss the part of the report that said with a high level of certainty that Iran is now a friendly nation, dedicated to peace in the region? and is now no longer any threat to the region?

So either the the anti-bush crowd here has access to a different report than everyone else -or the bush hating myopia is kicking in again...

Bush is such a shameless liar that he will say and do anything to justify a military hit on Iran.

How do the neo-con supporters here actually live with this and support it? Would it be so hard to believe that Iran has no intention of building bombs and/or using them against us? Maybe they felt they needed them to keep us out? George and Dick would definitely love to get their Haliburton smelling hands into another oil-rich country before the end of this term.
Just like the Red Fear, Neo-Cons shout about the next big attack that is coming. Keep building bomb shelters in the back yard while this administration spends a TRILLION dollars on this war. Why are you not outraged at the fact that the trillion dollars invested could have been spent to completely overhaul our healthcare system and our social security shortages.
Wake up and face the battles that are already staring at us here!

RCK-

Thanks for confirming that you too believe the Bush Adminstration lies continually.

Now go do a bit of reading on the missile shield. You seem a bit confused about what they are. They themselves are missiles, designed to shoot down enemy ballistic missile warheads.

Bush looked like a deer caught in headlights today.

Looks like the jig is up, hopefully gitmo orange is on Santa's list for these war criminals

VOTE RON PAUL 2008

Join the largest grassroots political movement in modern history!

The Revolution is NOW!

Posted by: Chris | December 4, 2007 1:15 PM

Chris- 9/11 was not an inside job.. Ron Paul does nothing to distance himself from this lunatic point of view- making him as looney as his consituency.

There is no grass roots movement... sorry

Bush insists Iran still a threat and he's not 'dispirited'

Yep, they've got to keep up the fear mongering otherwise the Republicans would have nothing to run on.

I suspect that the gist of the NIE report was about to be leaked requiring the Administration to go into denial mode. Our intelligence and military community have long concluded quietly that they are not dealing with rational civilian leadership and have no intention of furthing what has become a national nightmare. Nothing illustrates the clumsy and incompetent state of our foreign affairs more than Condi Rice explaining that the new missle shield was to protect against Iran!

The President is right Iran is a worldwide threat especially to Israel and the USA if it keeps enriching uranium and gets a nuclear weapon. Bush is right they had a covert program means than get one going again.
Mahmoud is the worse man on planet earth. Jerry White, Springfield, IL

Posted by: Jerry White | December 4, 2007 11:58 AM

Crazy Jerry,

This is a Very LOUD Fox News Alert, I'm Britt Hume!

The headchopping terrorists are making their way to America right this very minute, they've been quoted as saying that they're target is Springfield, IL. (after first going to Streamwood IL to get the "ilk" that is Crazy Johnny Devola).

The President has reacted to this news by changing the color coded terror alert system:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/agent_smith/1277157437/

Thankyou and remember at Fox we distrort and you decide...if we're telling the truth.

Let's look at this. Intelligence reports dating back into the 1990s said Iraq had WMDs (something the ignorant Loons on the Left keep overlooking). But apparently after we got into Iraq, those WMDs weren't there.
Now the Left and its media drones are boasting intelligence that indicates Iran stopped its nuclear weapons program in 2003. COurse, they do not suspect the intelligence could be wrong again because the Left and its media drones want everyone to think Iran is a nice, cozy, friendly country that is full of love and cheefulness. And the Left and its media drones actually want Iran to get nuclear weapons anyway. The quicker Americans and our evil American corporations get nuked, the happier the Left will be.

Luke, are you trying to make a point here? I guess I'm the idiot for trying to make a point to somebody who believes we have missile shields in Eastern Europe to attack and protect against a threat in the middle east. I don't know what you know about Russia, but they're not exactly a free countries' greatest ally.

Heartburn says, "Did I miss the part of the report that said with a high level of certainty that Iran is now a friendly nation, dedicated to peace in the region? and is now no longer any threat to the region?"

Heartburn, the part you missed came from the liberal handbook called, "see no evil, hear no evil." France donated it to liberals in the US prior to WWII.

Soo Russia came out on top. The whole entire time that the missile defense system was in the air, to counter the threat Iran posses, Russia said they would consider the shield--cooperate-- IF Iran was a threat. THEIR intelligence agency presented that IRAN did not have weapons. It would be preposterous to put up a shield to counter a threat that isn't there. For what uranium enrichment?? Iran is entitled to nuclear power for energy. Maybe Mr Bush should now work out on the issue instead of threatening them. They did as much with NK. It doesn't matter. The US is still set on expanding the reach of their nuclear arsenals, encircle Russia and China to deter potential rivals, threaten nuclear power seeking nations into submission...to open up previously closed market to the us.... to unilaterally prop up Israel in their conflicts...every report every time will always neo-cons will isolate the part that supports their "fears" for actions to "pre-empt" no "prevent" an attack...stupid neo-con agenda...at some point they get to accomplish their goals but in the long run those same achievements to pipe down threats cause those threats to mobilize... to distrust the US..to resent our status quo.. yes history will judge.. history will judge this man and his experiment in the use of US power as a failure ushering more problems for the next century...

How's Osama bin Laden doing Mr Bush? Aren't you glad he came along to legitimize your cause that has now proven illegit...Yes because I don't think anyone signed up for where you are taking us.

President Bush is right. Any country with nuclear or missile capability is a continuing threat that must be watched, just as any thug on the street must be watched. There is no single front in this war and America's security shield must be everywhere. The Left moans about the cost but they forget the hundreds of billions that the 9-11 attack inflicted on our nation. The cost of defense is high; the cost of cowering is much higher.

Posted by: Geraldine | December 4, 2007 11:51 AM

Too bad W slept through the reading of the memos warning about 9-11 that were read to him on one of his numerous vacations at home. Isn't it time we examine why we must 'defend' ourselves into bankruptcy?

COurse, they do not suspect the intelligence could be wrong again because the Left and its media drones want everyone to think Iran is a nice, cozy, friendly country that is full of love and cheefulness.
Posted by: John D | December 4, 2007 2:15 PM

You should just be ignored for the hilarious ignorance of your statements, but what does it matter what Iran is? And what about Pakistan? And for your information, Americans are still senselessly dying not because of nukes, but because of a blundered, preemptive military action to serve corporate interests.

John D the intelligence is only right to you when it fits your argument. Having gone through the ringer over the intelligence communities incompetence I highly doubt that the intelligence community didn't learn it's lesson. Why is Bush using the intelligence any way..or the parts he likes...and why isn't he investigating your accusations before making this speech....is he that gullible..what was that saying he goes by fool me once shame on you fool me twice...shame on...

"And the Left and its media drones actually want Iran to get nuclear weapons anyway. The quicker Americans and our evil American corporations get nuked, the happier the Left will be."

Keep over extending your accusations..please the world is black and white.....peace is war....fearmongerer and most likely to scream fire if it suits your argument.

What are we to make of George Bush, his ally Tony Blair ,and their common guru, Benedict XVI, our man in Regensberg?

Tony Blair still maintains that there is evil out there and that it is his 'catholic' duty to scotch that evil on our behalf , whether we want him to or not. George Bush, on the other hand, was willing to lead us YET AGAIN into WW111 , on the basis that if Iraq hadn't got the nuclear wherewithal, then Iran had.

Now, however, we find that there is no such threat from Iran. And we should thank all our Gods that he waited this time for an actual report to inform him yet again that he has got it wrong.

What then of the Pope, who has so long ago made his animus for another crusade perfectly clear?

It is obvious to most people, that this Christian nonsense that only Christianised holdy finger are the only ones in the world who can have nuclear power is precisely the Christian terrorism that we should be afraid of.

Mr Blair has become a Catholic, the Pope is delighted to make propaganda to the effect that he was agasint what Tony and George Bush got up to, in their search for Christian Lebensraum, and George Bush has discovered something:

There is somebody out there who was , who is, and who will always be , dangerous. Only the GOD of the Christians knows!

Seamus Breathnach

www.irish-criminology.com

NOTE: It has just been announced that the Chimps have beaten a set of humans on a memory test. Does that mean that the chimps have more regard for history than the Post-Darwinian moderns?

RCK,which part of my statement would you consider incorrect?

You have to love the rightwingnuts.

They go around complaining about all of the entitlement programs that the country spends money on.

Then they turn around time after time and give us their chicken little sky is falling predictions as a sign that we need to build up the military. Ironic that it was a REPBULICAN, Eisenhower, who was the first to warn Americans about the danger of a military/industrial complex. Yet every REPUBLICAN President since Eisenhower just can't seem to feed enough money into that same complex.

The US is spending more money on their military than any other nation in the world and yet for the rightwingnuts, it's still not enough. NOW we have to be concerned about those "terrorists". It's a great ploy for the Republicans. They no longer have to build up a specific danger, they can just leave it to a nebulous "terrorist" organization that is going to attack the US.

When will we wake up to the manipulation going on?

This can't be!

Who am I supposed to be afraid of now?
I'm already afraid to leave my house for fear that Osama is hiding in the bushes.

http://photobucket.com/mediadetail/?media=http%3A%2F%2Fi76.photobucket.com%2Falbums%2Fj2%2Fdanakf1%2FMission-Accomplished.gif&searchTerm=mission%20accomplished&pageOffset=2

"It's not going to happen on my watch,'' the president said.

What else happened on "his" watch?

Loon, I doubt your numbers are accurate, but calling our President a liar for acting on what he thought was credible intelligence makes those of you who call him a liar sound like loony liberals with adolescent critical thinking skills. U.S. intelligence is an abysmal failure. If you want to blame the President for something, blame him for failing to address that.

John D, I used to think you had some semblance of intelligence but that statement that the left would like people nuked is over the top. You have become Jerry White II.

They no longer have to build up a specific danger, they can just leave it to a nebulous "terrorist" organization that is going to attack the US.

When will we wake up to the manipulation going on?

Posted by: dogjudge | December 4, 2007 2:48 PM

What is "nebulous" about the threat of a nuclear Iran?

Before you attack arguments for being too "nebulous", you might want to find a way to get to the point yourself- your post begins with the incredibly creative, never heard before, "right wingnuts" moniker , lapses into half thoughts (ranging from entitlement programs to the military industrial complex)and finishes with a charge of "us" not being aware of the manipulation that is goung on?

Did you read this article? Or do you just create posts by cutting and pasting from your list of left wing rants?

John D

That post of yours made absoultly no sense at all.

RCK,

I have a question for you.

Assume that you are the CEO of General Motors. You need to make decisions about the vehicles that you are going to introduce in 2009. You tell the appropriate internal departments that you want all of the information that they can glean about what the major competitors are planning. Funny thing. All of the information that they come back with appears to be an absolute reflection of YOUR thoughts.

The difference between a bad CEO and a good one is that they learn to question the information that they are given to insure that the information is accurate.

For six years, while the Republicans controlled the House and the Senate, NO ONE ever questioned the administration about what they were presenting to Congress and to the American people. At this date there is still a tremendous amount that we don't know about who knew what and when.

From your post it is apparent that you feel that the administration made the best decision based on the information that they had.

You know, I and many others don't feel the same. We went to the UN. They didn't buy what we were selling. Many times along the way, the administration used the veil of secrecy to tell America that they couldn't give us all of the information for going into the war because is was to sensitive. Now despite years of saying that Iran is a threat, we find out that what the rest of the world was correct and our neocon hawks were wrong again.

At what point will YOU begin to question that perhaps, JUST PERHAPS, that it isn't the information that's wrong, but the people listening to the information are cherry picking what they want to sell to America now?

How many times will it take?

Cheryl,

This President has had a disdain for the media and there's no way he'll be doing any confessing to any reporter who calls him out. If you came away with the sense "that he's lying again," then they done their jobs. Now it's up to you in the voting booth.

RCK,

Isn't the point that he had intelligence about Iraq and spun it to his ill-conceived agenda. The intelligence community ain't great, but having it politicized by a half-wit and his evil minions hasn't helped.

There have been 4,187 coalition deaths -- 3,882 Americans, two Australians, 173 Britons, 13 Bulgarians, one Czech, seven Danes, two Dutch, two Estonians, one Fijian, one Hungarian, 33 Italians, one Kazakh, one Korean, three Latvian, 22 Poles, three Romanians, five Salvadoran, four Slovaks, 11 Spaniards, two Thai and 18 Ukrainians -- in the war in Iraq as of December 3, 2007, according to a CNN count. (Graphical breakdown of casualties). The list below is the names of the soldiers, Marines, airmen, sailors and Coast Guardsmen whose deaths have been reported by their country's governments. The list also includes seven employees of the U.S. Defense Department. At least 28,582 U.S. troops have been wounded in action, according to the Pentagon. View casualties in the war in Afghanistan and examine U.S. war casualties dating back to the Revolutionary War.

http://www.cnn.com/SPECIALS/2003/iraq/forces/casualties/index.html

RCK,here's my source.Try the link which shows a picture of every soldier that's been killed in "Your" President's deceitful war.

Please apply your superior thinking skills and refrain from treating our fallen soldiers as pawns in your wing nut quest for power.

DogJudge: That is a well thought out scenario, however, if I'm the CEO of GM and I have a bunch of yes men working for me, then why am I sending them on this fact finding mission in the first place? Why not just tell them to write up a report that Chrysler is building so and so.
However, if I'm truly interested in what the competition is doing, then I will send my well qualified team to find out for me. If they provide me with inaccurate information and the competition makes me look incompetent, then I take the blame and replace my ineffective staff. Fool me once shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

BTW, the intelligence Bush used to make a case for Husseins removal is the same intelligence that Clinton had when he said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.

pd and michael, while over the top, the point is, that there are those on the Left, perhaps not you folks but others on the Left, who hate every U.S. corporation and basically hate this country. That fact is undeniable. Would they like the U.S. to be nuked? You tell me. Seems to me in the 1980s anything Reagan did to make this country stronger and the Soviets weaker was met with protest from the Left. And you know what? Reagan was right, wasn't he?

Loon, I don't watch or read the Clinton News Network so save the links for your fellow conspiracy theorists & save your manure regurgitation for the Che rallies.

BTW, the intelligence Bush used to make a case for Husseins removal is the same intelligence that Clinton had when he said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.

Posted by: RCK | December 4, 2007 3:50 PM

that's exactly the point, RCK!!!

The information was the same, but all the sudden the threat became grave and imminent (speaking of "mushroom clouds" and such). And then, after the chickenhawks got their war, Woops! I guess the threat wasn't that eminent after all! Well, it's too late now!

The fact that it was the same information that went from not eminent or war-worthy under one administration, to war-worthy under the next (although turning out to not be warworthy after all), that reinforces DogJudge's point:

"At what point will YOU begin to question that perhaps, JUST PERHAPS, that it isn't the information that's wrong, but the people listening to the information are cherry picking what they want to sell to America now?"

RCK,

"BTW, the intelligence Bush used to make a case for Husseins removal is the same intelligence that Clinton had when he said that Iraq had nuclear weapons."

See that's where we disagree.

Many Bush supporters will cite things such as this in a twofold way. #1 - Clinton said that Iraq had nuclear weapons therefore . . . #2 - Bush based his decisions on intelligence information that he was given. Only when that is questioned, they then say it was the fault of the intelligence community NOT Bush's fault. (As an aside, if it wasn't Bush's fault, then it wasn't Clinton's fault either.)

Actually there is NO proof whatsoever that Bush and Cheney didn't cherry pick intelligence. Remember, Cheney, set up his own intelligence group when he wasn't getting information from the normal channels that supported his position.

So which is it? Cherry picked, or faulty intelligence. If it's the later, why should the American people trust these same folks when they were supporting the President a year ago?

See that's the problem with your argument. You want to use faulty intelligence and good intelligence, but only when it suits your position.

Ah, easier to agree to disagree.

Well, it looks like the Neo-Con Neo_Nazi's have found a replacement for Paulo, who has been absent from the Swamp for a while in RCK. Between you and John D., I can't figure who is the most insane?

In any logical thinking, the idea that a person (or a country) has the right to attack someone (or a nation) on the presumed notion that they might possess a weapon (which according to the Bush administration, need not be proven with any hard evidence) or even that they might have some knowledge to pass off (which by the way can be found on the internet by anyone looking)is absolutly idiotic. Try that defense in court when you have been hauled infron of a judge for assult and battery and your excuse was that the person you beat either had a weapon or had the knowledge of a weapon and might pass it off to someone who might use it on you will land you in jail and possibly the psycho-ward for evaluation.

As far as the Jerusalem Post and Israel is concerned, let them defend themselves. They are a big-kid now, and they possess their own nuclear arsenal, they certainetly don't need our help at all. We have no strategic need to defend Israel, unless ofcourse of the Evangelical Christians are hoping for Bush and his Neo-Con Neo-Nazis to push Israel in destroying the Temple Mount and rebuilding the Temple and initiating the Second Comming as is fortold in Prophsey?

RCK:

you know the difference is between BC and GWB, given the same intelligence?

One ordered some sites bombed and was accused of trying to wag the dog.

The other sent 4000+ U.S. service members to their death and 20000+ maimed, and I don't have to tell you how much was spent out of our treasury.

I have no problem picking the better executive of the two. But I'm sure you'll beg to differ.

“Iran is dangerous, and Iran will be dangerous"

Huh??? Bush made statements today that are untrue. I think today ended Bush and Cheneys dream of war with Iran.

Christmas came early today!

I guess he wants to keep starting wars until he wins one.

"Nothing has changed"

This sums up this administration.

Luke, are you trying to make a point here? I guess I'm the idiot for trying to make a point to somebody who believes we have missile shields in Eastern Europe to attack and protect against a threat in the middle east."

Hey, I'm just telling you what the President YOU support said about the missiles. It's not my fault he was either lying or is wrong. He used Iran's supposed nuke weapons program to justify the missile shield, not me. Bush is who your arguement is with.

BTW, the intelligence Bush used to make a case for Husseins removal is the same intelligence that Clinton had when he said that Iraq had nuclear weapons.

Posted by: RCK | December 4, 2007 3:50 PM

That's the problem in a nut shell.

Bush ignored the later evidence that was coming in because it did not fit his plan.

The UN inspectors were back in Iraq and wre reporting that they were getting cooperation from the Iraqis and were finding no evidence for WMDs. They begged for a few more months to complete their task, but Bush ignored them and chose war.

John D,

Who on the left is overlooking that Iraq HAD WMD's? Hell we and our allies gave them the capacity to develop them. The U.N. sanctions and Clinton's Cruise Missile party in '98 are big reasons why Iraq was not a threat in 2003 (the bombings that Republicans accused Clinton of "wagging the dog"). This is what I posted last week, Dyslin. Read it before making wild generalizations, marathon man.

Terry...about those WMD's and who was quoting what:

(eriposte)

On the June 15 [2003] Meet the Press, Wesley Clark offered an intriguing thought about those AWOL WMD:

RUSSERT: Was there an intelligence failure? Was the intelligence hyped, as Senator Joe Biden said? Was the president misled, or did he mislead the American people?

CLARK: Well, several things. First of all, all of us in the community who read intelligence believe that Saddam wanted these capabilities and he had some. We struck very hard in December of ’98, did everything we knew, all of his facilities. I think it was an effective set of strikes. Tony Zinni commanded that, called Operation Desert Fox, and I think that set them back a long ways.

George Tenet in a report to Congress in Feb. 2001 (from raw story):

We do not have any direct evidence that Iraq has used the period since Desert Fox to reconstitute its WMD programs...

Tenet also continued that sentence with "...although given its past behavior, this type of activity must be regarded as likely." But the basic point is that even if Saddam Hussein possessed WMDs or WMD programs in 1998, Clinton's 1998 bombings of Iraq's WMD facilities destroyed them at that time (which would require the need to "reconstitute"). So, using the "same" intelligence from 1998 to go to war in 2003 would be the most blatant form of fraud.

George Bush, 10/11/00:

We don't know whether he's developing weapons of mass destruction. He better not be or there's going to be a consequence should I be the president.

Colin Powell, 2/24/01:

...the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they [the U.N. sanctions] have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq...

And what about Scott Ritter's version of events? Ritter, who Bush's people tried to discredit, is an ex- Marine who fought in the Gulf War. He went on to become an intelligence specialist and U.N. inspector. By his account, over the seven years of the program, he and other inspectors were able to confirm that Iraq's chemical, biological, and nuclear weapons programs were effectively destroyed.

Mark Silva--you let the one who tells lies about war and death steamroll all over you and your question today at the presser. Bush must like you--he knows you by sight and name. Did you earn that center seat for agreeing to set up the question for Bush to rant on in his defensive tirade? What happened? An answer to this would make a great blog article. Will you post this?

there are those on the Left, perhaps not you folks but others on the Left, who hate every U.S. corporation and basically hate this country. That fact is undeniable.
-
I deny it. You used the plural, so name two.