Yeah bowfinger, tell the soldiers who were fighting and dying trying to SECURE cities, bases, and multitudes of other targets that we only protected the oil infrastructure. Tell the special forces who were on the ground at various suspected WMD sites HOURS after the invasion we devoted zero to those sites. In usual piecemeal manner, you take grains of bad news (like some WMD-related materials missing) and extrapolate it into full-scale neglects and disasters. And once again you prove my point that the zealous anti-Iraq/anti-Bush drivel is always seeking contradictory angles. You people claim there were no threats from WMD-type stuff in Iraq (and argue tooth and nail that none existed), yet you now lambast Bush because according to you he let dangerous stuff go lose and it's a threat. It's just another example out of dozens we see on the site, just like this topic BBond created. Ideas of the US devoting so much attention to oil spew forth from the drones, yet the next day they complain that we're not defending pipelines and such properly. Same old same old.... gotta have it all ways to perpetrate the hate for Bush. It's a blind seething hate that masks all truth and renders reasoning skills useless.
Bush could say the sky is blue and the anti-Bush nuts would scream that it's red. Then if Bush changes to red, they'll screech that it's yellow.
"I read your words just fine, thank you very much. You made a fallacious accusation against Bush opponents, a fact you conveniently ignore in your "rebuttal".
If you read my words just fine you'd know that my argument wasn't fallacious, a fact you conveniently ignore.
"No, your biased and baseless attacks on Bush's opponents demonstrate your support of Bush. If it walks like a parrot, and talks like a parrot ... For the record, I did not call you a "Bush lover" or a "neocon". What was that about reading the words?"
You need to explain how my attack is biased, and as I have shown they are not baseless. I am not defending Bush because it's not my job and I can care less about him. I am defending our actions, because I support them. And for the record, in a clever semantic evasion you are right that you didn't call me a "Bush lover"... but you did say I used Bush colored lenses. If it walks like a parrot, and talks like a parrot...
"Hello, McFly!?! That's the point. We supposedly didn't learn there were no WMDs at these facilities until many, many months later. Remember the search team led by David Kay? Remember how they were dismayed to find that the sites on the U.S.-approved list of WMD stockpiles had been looted by the time they got there? I think you're right. I think Bush & Co. knew those sites had no WMDs long before we invaded ... yet we invaded anyway. Hmmmm.
By the way, you (again) ignored the rest of my point, namely that the Bush so-called "plan" did not secure other critical sites, e.g., the weapons depots where the insurgents got the weapons that have killed hundred of our troops, the nuclear facility where IAEA-sealed drums of yellowcake were looted along with who knows what else, and the Iraqi Intelligence Ministry (or whatever it was called) where we might have recovered hard evidence of Iraq's WMD capabilities ... or lack of same. "
Wrong again. We were learning that there were no WMDs from the first days we invaded, culminating in the recent report. There were hundreds of sites, some that we knew of and some that we didn't. Many were checked... reports of not finding expected WMDs were trickling in early on. Just because there were mistakes and some material may have been jacked doesn't automatically mean there was gross negligence and the whole occupation was flawed. That's your own Bush-hating conclusion. (by the way, how do WMD stocks get looted as you say, when you argue there were no WMDs? another contradiction... forget it)
Wrong again. The coalition confiscated and/or destroyed hundreds of tons of Iraqi armaments, but because the militias and such "melted" into the populace rather quickly, they did have stocks. In your supreme Bush-failed-at-all-costs mentality, you ask the impossible.
"Yes, it would have been. We might have saved hundreds of American lives and thousands of Iraqi lives."
I doubt guarding empty warehouses would have done that.
If you want to see general tactics and goals of the US forces invading Iraq -and understand what we were protecting and doing there- check and search the DoD website... I'm not your link monkey. Don't be so lazy and learn. And if you want to see whatever YOU want in my words, be my guest because you're awfully good at it.
Facebook
Twitter