Friday, September 19, 2003

MR BUSH- WHY DID WE GO TO WAR WITH IRAQ?

Lost Trust:
Mr. Bush Has Lied So Many Times We Just Don't Know What to Believe Anymore


This is what Bush said that day on the aircraft carrier, bedecked in the flight suit:

"...... The battle of Iraq is one victory in a war on terror that began on September the 11, 2001 - and still goes on. That terrible morning, 19 evil men - the shock troops of a hateful ideology - gave America and the civilized world a glimpse of their ambitions. They imagined, in the words of one terrorist, that September the 11th would be the "beginning of the end of America." By seeking to turn our cities into killing fields, terrorists and their allies believed that they could destroy this nation's resolve, and force our retreat from the world. They have failed....

.....The liberation of Iraq is a crucial advance in the campaign against terror. We've removed an ally of al Qaeda, and cut off a source of terrorist funding. And this much is certain: No terrorist network will gain weapons of mass destruction from the Iraqi regime, because the regime is no more.

....In these 19 months that changed the world, our actions have been focused and deliberate and proportionate to the offense. We have not forgotten the victims of September the 11th - the last phone calls, the cold murder of children, the searches in the rubble. With those attacks, the terrorists and their supporters declared war on the United States. And war is what they got.


When truth takes flight, only an empty suit remains.



....Our war against terror is proceeding according to principles that I have made clear to all: Any person involved in committing or planning terrorist attacks against the American people becomes an enemy of this country, and a target of American justice.

Any person, organization, or government that supports, protects, or harbors terrorists is complicit in the murder of the innocent, and equally guilty of terrorist crimes.

...Any outlaw regime that has ties to terrorist groups and seeks or possesses weapons of mass destruction is a grave danger to the civilized world - and will be confronted......."


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

This is what he said two days ago after VP Dick Cheney once again misled the public on Meet The Press about the Saddam/9-11 connection:

Bush said there was no attempt by the administration to try to confuse people about any link between Saddam and Sept. 11.


“No, we’ve had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th....What the vice president said was is that he (Saddam) has been involved with al-Qaida....
And al-Zarqawi, al-Qaida operative, was in Baghdad. He’s the guy that ordered the killing of a U.S. diplomat. ... There’s no question that Saddam Hussein had al-Qaida ties.”



Note: Jordanian Abu Musab al-Zarqawi is a leader of an Islamic group in northern Iraq called Ansar al-Islam believed to have links to al-Qaeda. He ONCE received medical care in Baghdad. If this and the faulty legend of one of the suicide bombers meeting with Iraqi intelligence (never proven) is all they've got, it's flimsy at best.

In a Sept. 6 interview with The Washington Post, Paul Wolfowitz said hundreds of fighters from al-Qaeda and other groups were now in Iraq....after we took out the Hussein regime. You will note that Wolfowitz acts as if this was an unexpected consequence of taking Saddam out of the picture...but I beg to differ.

Wolfowitz has said: "There are some thousands of former Baathists and some hundreds of al-Qaeda and other foreign terrorists who are ... killing Americans and Iraqis and U.N. officials and moderate Shiite leaders in order to destabilize Iraq.''

It seems to me, after we look back at the failure to locate WMDs and the flimsy (highly changeable) reasons and false references to the Iraq/9-11 connection, that the Bush administration had their own reasons for attacking Iraq.
Amazingly, they never bother to share the real reason.

Bush said in his last speech to the nation:

"...Two years ago, I told the Congress and the country that the war on terror would be a lengthy war, a different kind of war, fought on many fronts in many places. Iraq is now the central front. Enemies of freedom are making a desperate stand there -- and there they must be defeated."

This leads me to believe Bush intended for Iraq to become the "central front" for the war on terror. It seems we did not go as moral defenders of the people of Iraq...and we know now that Iraq did not pose a significant threat to us...(it's more dangerous for America today than it was before the war).

It seems we went into Iraq because we knew Saddam's regime was weak...and we bet that his people were weakened by years of sanctions. Previously contained, it would be an easy government to roll over.

What we seem to have gone into Iraq for was to PROVOKE terror.
We seem to have desired to make Iraq the central front for terror.

How moral is that?

How just is that for the people of Iraq?

Is this what Bush means by American justice?

Is it any wonder the Iraqis have a groundswell of resistance? (Or "terror", as the Bush administration prefers to call it, being allergic to the word "resistance").

WHY THE HELL DID WE REALLY GO TO WAR, MR. BUSH?
Have you defrauded America?