"President Bush Was Right"
As Investors Business Daily points out, evidence continues to emerge suggesting that there were, indeed, WMD in Iraq.
. . . advocating American political and religious liberty, free enterprise, limited government, military strength and traditional values.
4 Comments:
Once again Carol tries valiantly only to founder on the shoals of logic. The IBD piece combines all of the prominent theories--massive semi convoys, air lifts in civilian jets, and Spetznatz commandos--in the hope of finding something, anything, that might gain some traction. Unfortunately, nothing will gain any traction until it passes the "smell test."
In its simplest form, the smell test lies in answering one simple question. It is the same question I have asked repeatedly and that neither Carol nor anyone else has ever even attempted to answer.
No one can deny that the failure to find WMD in Iraq has had huge negative impacts for the United States both on the international and on the domestic front.
Internationally, U.S. standing in both the Middle East and around the world stands in tatters because no WMD were found in Iraq. This limits our options in handling other situations of national interest (e.g., Iran).
Domestically, the administration's political credibility has been shredded because no WMD were found in Iraq. This is one of the primary drivers behind the cratering of public support for the war in Iraq.
Given the corrosive effects of the failure to find WMD in Iraq, why doesn't the adminstration provide evidence that Iraq WMD were shipped to Syria if they have it? What does the Bush administration have to gain by refusing to prove that Iraq had WMD exactly as they claimed prior to the invasion?
Until someone can provide a persuasive answer to this simple question,it is clear they are grasping at conspiratorial straws.
You'll find things will more easily pass the "smell test", Mr. Twister, when you get your head out of the sand.
You can't smell anything like that.
Nice non-answer, Greg.
A perfect response to your non-argument.
Post a Comment
<< Home