It’s His War
Tweet
I really hope the Dems don’t back out of this plan to get out of Iraq because Bush threatened to veto it. Do what it takes to get it to a vote. Get it to pass, and let the legacy of the first Republican president of the 21st century be the man who vetoed stem cell research and a war that has killed thousands of Americans.
47 Responses to “It’s His War”
GOP Rep. Spencer Bachus Facing House Ethics Probe For Insider Trading
Jennifer Aniston Reportedly Pregnant With Twins
PHOTOS: Tamara Ecclestone At The Langham Hotel
Red Front? “Center For American Freedom” Logo Echoes Communist Style
Romney Calls For Defunding Planned Parenthood, Wife Was A Donor
GOP Fundraising Email Asks Supporters To “Knock Out” Obama
Romney Comes Up Limp In Nevada
Obama Opens Lead On Romney In New Poll
Latest Entries
Why Do Liberals Support Drone Strikes?
Weekly Standard Rolls Out The Iraq Argument For Iran
Equal Polarization, My Ass
Some Crazy Stuff That Happened In World War II
Maryland Republican Campaign Funds Used To Defend Voter Suppression
The Obama Jobs Record In One Graph
Martin O’Malley All In For Marriage Equality
Newt Gingrich, Filled With More Excrement Than Your Average Politician
New Year, Powerline Still Stupid
Thanks Again
Meta
Blogroll
Disclaimer
The views on this site are mine and mine alone, and do not reflect the views of my employer, Media Matters for America
© 2000-2011 Oliver Willis
Let him veto it. It’s tied to war funding.
Just because you don’t support it doesn’t make it “his war.”
You are right Ian, Oliver’s lack of support has nothing to do with it being Bush’s war. Lying about WMDs and AL Qaeda links, diplomatic failures in the run up, failing to send enough troops, making the call to invade, failing to have any kind of real occupation plan, failure to adapt, failure to have an exit strategy, torture and failing to win the hearts and minds, Bring It On, rampant corruption, no bid contracts to corrupt donor companies, lack of accounting, lack of accountability, blustering, stay the course, calling anyone who doesn’t support Bush’s war a traitor or terrorist sympathiser or similar, billions of dollars flushed away with no idea where or how, putting cronies and unqualified people in charge there, etc etc etc. All those make it Bush’s war.
Ian | Mar 8, 2007 9:09:19 PM
“Just because you don’t support it doesn’t make it “his war.”"
LoL! OK, how about ‘his invasion’?
I expect that the democrats will continue to demonstrate the strength of will we have seen so far.
I mean, damn, to push through that five-day work week? Powerful. Of course, it hasn’t happened either.
Sorry guys, the democrats are politicians too, and now the american people are going to get to see their true colors…
Oh, by the way, epic having john mccain ads on your website!
Shorter pedro: I am a douchebag, and have nothing important to say on this topic.
Thank you, pedro, for blessing us with your stunning intellect and expert analysis.
Bush Kampf
It’s Bush’s war in the sense that he bears the responsibility for it.
It’s not Bush’s war in the sense that it’s his children who have to die for it.
“the man who vetoed stem cell research”?
Do you really think this will be important historically?
Also, if, God forbid, it is discovered that a lack of resolve turns out be disastrous, this will be America’s second, and last Vietnam. America will go the way of the British Empire, a circumstance liberals apparently anticipate with great relish.
And make no mistake about it, I am questioning the patriotism of liberals:
Frank Miller
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel. Samuel Johnson.
Nationalism is an infantile disease. It is the measles of mankind. Albert Einstein.
Heroism on command, senseless violence, and all the loathsome nonsense that goes by the name of patriotism – how passionately I hate them! Einstein again.
All war and conflict is naught but the failure of imagination. Alan Moore.
Eat dick, Frank. Rex Mundane.
Its also not all Bush’s war in the sense that it would not have happened if scads of Democrats had not voted for war – Democrats who are on record saying Saddam had WMD programs and something must be done.
And less ‘children’ (read all volunteer adults) have died in this war than any other ‘war’.
Furthermore, nothing would give Republicans a better chance at a presidency they should losse otherwise, than have the face of the party become pro-surrender radicals like Pelosi and Murtha.
Of course, the bad news for us is that Pelosi’s surrender plan won’t pass and the yahoo surrender faction go back to internal bickering – leaving the adults in charge.
The same “adults” who decided to go to war. Why must you all persist in keeping alive the myth that Bush didn’t make the final decision to go to war. You guys must be those 23-30% last hopers we keep seeing in the polls.
Blah Blah Blah, Dugger.
Put together that list of Bush Administration claims about Iraqi WMDs that turned out to be true. Still waiting.
Until then, you cede the point that Bush lied to get that resolution. Incidently, if the war was going well (like that ever could have happened with Commander In-Competent) you’d be screaming and blathering about Bush’s War.
As it stands, the Bush legacy in Iraq is one of failure. No one else bears that responsibility.
What is the democratic plan? Accountability. We’ve had 4 years of Bush excuses for his failures, now settling on the fervant hope that by sending more troops the Iraqis will stand up and take charge of their destiny. The democratic plan simply enforces what Bush says is his solution. The Iraqis must step up or we will step out.
Of course we all know the real Bush plan: repeat slogans, close your eyes and pretend everything is going good, and hope it all solves itself.
Its also not all Bush’s war in the sense that it would not have happened if scads of Democrats had not voted for war
Are you saying that Bush would have abandoned plans for an invasion if there had been no amf? Tell me another.
Also, since the republicans pretty much unanimously supported the amf, only a bare handful of democrats (far less than a ‘scad’) would have had to support it for it to pass. Your continuing effort to pass the buck continues to fail.
Democrats who are on record saying Saddam had WMD programs and something must be done.
That “something” did not necessarily include a precipitous, ill-planned and ill-prepared invasion. That’s all down to George and his team.
And less ‘children’ (read all volunteer adults) have died in this war than any other ‘war’.
Regardless of how old adults get they can still be somebody’s children. George Bush’s children are adults. We’re all God’s children.
And, as usual, you’re forgetting the Iraqi children, many of which are, indeed, children.
And if you think that a large number of carelessly squandered lives is not a tragedy just because there were more deaths in some other period of conflict, then you and I operate in totally different moral universes.
Not that I didn’t know that already.
Speaking of polls, according to the latest ones, public approval of Congress (with that Democratic majority) is now at the same low level (34.0%) as their approval of Bush. Disapproval for Congress is even higher than it is for Bush (60.0% vs 53.2%). Man, that’s gotta sting.
It’s a shame that the Democrats haven’t been able to convince the American public that they can do a better job than the Republicans.
Wait…I thought on odd-numbered Fridays, polls were biased and unreliable.
Disapproval for Congress is even higher than it is for Bush (60.0% vs 53.2%).
I’ve got the numbers reversed. Congress has a slightly lower disapproval rating (53.2% vs. 60.0%) than Bush. My mistake. Still gotta hurt, though.
“Until then, you cede the point that Bush lied to get that resolution.”
What? Cede an untruth? No lie by Pres Bush has been documented.
Wilbur,
No I agree Bush has primary war responsibility – but not sole responsibility. You can’t escape the fact that many Democrats voted for war. Some like John Edwards ahve acknowledged their war votes and apologized to the radicals. Some haven’t.
Our Army is all volunteer and the death rate in this ‘war’ is much, much lower than Vietnam, Korea, WWII and WWI. I volunteered along time ago. I was not a child. Nor were my fellow military. ‘Child’ is a progressive construct, a hold over from Vietnam days. If soldiers are children, is it ever moral to send children into war?
Our Army is all volunteer and the death rate in this ‘war’ is much, much lower than Vietnam, Korea, WWII and WWI.
Yeah like thats a viable excuse for the inept handling of Post War Iraq by Bush and company. Our military did its job in the early stages of the war…this administration ignored decades of research by qualified military analysts that stated that an insurgency and civil war was likely to break out if the security situation was not addressed from the beginning. Bush and his partisan and inexperienced operatives (ahem…Doug Feith)decided to ignore this research and now our troops are caught in surprise surprise a civil war fueled by insurgents. This is the true tragedy of this war.
And to repeat this point to the brain dead CONS in the audience….
Edwards and the other Democrats voted to give Bush authorization to use force (AUMF). This was voted on September 18, 2001.
It stated The Authorization for Use of Military Force (“AUMF”) (Public law 107-40) was a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress on September 18, 2001, authorizing the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the attacks on September 11, 2001. .
At no point did this adminstration demonstratably prove that Iraq had anything to do with 9/11. So in my eyes the President ignored the AUMF and attacked a nation that had absolutely nothing to do with 9/11…….hence ITS HIS FUCKING WAR!!!!!!
Dugger, Blah Blah Blah. Let’s see your list. Truth is he ultimate defense against the charge of Lie. Get to work.
Also, rewriting history won’t change facts. Bush called for that resolution. He was granted the authority to go to war if it were necessary based on things like WMDs and terrorism. Iraq had neither.
Bush kept saying the decision to go to war hadn’t been made. He constantly repeated that until he invaded. The decision and thus the responsibility was his. The buck stopped with him.
My bad …I inadvertantly ignored Iraq War Resolution of 2002 that Mr Edwards and many other DEMS did vote for…my bad…..
My bad …I inadvertantly ignored Iraq War Resolution of 2002 that Mr Edwards and many other DEMS did vote for…my bad…..
Don’t worry, all the “brain dead CONS” in the audience understood that you didn’t know what you were talking about.
“No lie by Pres Bush has been documented.” Dugger
Dugger you need to stop waiting for Rush and Fox to document these lies. I googled “documented lies of president Bush” and received 1,600,000 results. The first of these showed plenty of documentation. I guess your fantasy world doesn’t include google.
Oh Rounds, Dugger starts with a belief that it is impossible for Bush to lie because everything he says is documented and therefore the risk of getting caught lying is too great. Then he moves into this bizarre motive defense, where it is impossible to prove that Bush is lying (even if you can prove what he is saying is false and Bush knows it is false) because you can’t possibly know his motives without reading his mind.
Its far easier to ignore Dugger’s stupid challenge (which has been met several times before) and ask him to show us where Bush was telling the truth.
This is a good one, Ollie.
The Rethuglycans have been desperately trying for months, maybe years now to find a way out of the burning tire Bush has hung around their neck, to match his.
Like good little Hitlerjugend, though, these loyalist numbskulls are going to wear Bush’s burning tire necklace of responsibility for Iraq even if it causes severe 3rd degree burns.
They are going to march loyally, in lockstep with George W. Bush, down into American History as one of the worst “Administrations” ever.
Couldn’t happen to a nicer bunch of miserable failures, LOL!
To return to the subject of the original post (i.e., I don’t care whose war it is, or was. I think it was, and is, a good idea), the Democratic [get out of the] war plan is in disarray.
midder
You will never find anything I have said to the effect that it is impossible for Bush to lie. In fact you will find that I have said Bush is human and I do believe he has probably lied. I have merely challenged the common leftist orthodoxy that Bush sort of ‘lies’ as a passing hobby and/or that he ‘lied’ us into war. thsoe lies have not been documented, nor do I know of a lie that ahs been documented re Bush as Prez.
rounds,
A lie requires intent. A contradiction without intent is not alie. A difference of opini0n is not a lie. A mistatement is not, per se, a lie, for instance (like good morning when it is PM). Saying something you think to be true but isn’t, is not a lie. Bad memory is not a lie. ‘Lie’ has a much higher approval threshold than just being wrong. I fully acknowledge progressives have unwavering faith that Bush lied and have documenetd what they see as lies ad nauseum on the Internet. Some believe Bush had 9-11 pre knowledge and lied. Some thing the yellow cakes words are lies. Some think the wiretap words are lies. None prove so under rational disscussion.
Now, give me a real lie.
“Iraq has weapons of mass destruction”.
Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that were used for the production of biological weapons.
GW Bush
Speech to UN General Assembly
September 12, 2002
Intelligence leaves no doubt that Iraq continues to possess and conceal lethal weapons
GW Bush, 18 March, 2003
“25,000 liters of anthrax … 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin … materials to produce as much as 500 tons of sarin, mustard and VX nerve agent … upwards of 30,000 munitions capable of delivering chemical agents … several mobile biological weapons labs … thousands of Iraqi security personnel … at work hiding documents and materials from the U.N. inspectors.”
GW Bush
State of the Union Address
January 28, 2003
We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons — the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have.
GW Bush
Radio Address
February 8, 2003
Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.
GW Bush
Address to the Nation
March 17, 2003
But for those who say we haven’t found the banned manufacturing devices or banned weapons, they’re wrong, we found them.
–George W. Bush
Interview with TVP Poland
5/30/2003 after reports of two trucks which were said to be Saddam’s Mobile Weapons Labs were discovered
You remember when [Secretary of State] Colin Powell stood up in front of the world, and he said Iraq has got laboratories, mobile labs to build biological weapons …They’re illegal. They’re against the United Nations resolutions, and we’ve so far discovered two…And we’ll find more weapons as time goes on And we’ll find more weapons as time goes on
–George W. Bush
Press Briefing
5/30/2003
I could go on and on and on …
You see no pattern of “intent” here?
“Now, by the way, any time you hear the United States government talking about wiretap, it requires — a wiretap requires a court order”
Pretty clear language for a guy that authorized wiretaps without warrants. Statement untrue. Speaker, aware its untrue. Verdict: Liar.
Really, the administration made lots of claims about Iraq having WMDs. Tell us the ones that were true. If someone tells people hundreds of things that all turn out to be false on the same subject, the easy conclusion is the person lied.
16 words. Iraq did not try to purchase uranium from Niger. The CIA expressed its doubts and asked it be removed from the speech and the administration still made the claim using semantics by attributing it to someone else. It’s still false, they had reason to believe it was false, and they presented it as true. Intent to deceive. Verdict: LIAR.
Now Dugger, get to work on all those Bush Claims about Iraqi WMDs that turned out to be true. Bush made the call, it’s Bush’s war.
http://thinkprogress.org/2006/11/08/bush-lied-rumsfeld/
Here’s the Rumsfeld thing too, where he said pre-election that Rumsfeld is sticking with him, and admitting at the time that he was considering his replacement when he was making that statement. The video basically has him admitting he lied in it, saying that he did it to consciously, with intent of what he was saying, and of how false it is, because “the only way to answer that question, and get it on to another question, was to give you [the reporters] that answer.”
Dammit Dugger even Bush has admitted that he’s lied. Why are you still so reticent about this? Do you honestly believe he’s been forthright about everything?
Please do go on and on ,Wellstone, and let me know which one of those you have knowledge of intent on. BTW, how do you explain all the Democrats who felt as Bush did about Saddam and WMDs? All of them lying? Every Democrat? Or are they allowed to be incorrect or mislead or brain dead and magically Bush is the only one with evil intent in his heart. It doesn’t pass common sense muster. Sure Bush or any human can lie. He probably has. But ‘lie’ has a higher proof threshold than just putting up seemingly contradictory statements, because once you dig into those statements, you discover context, timing, and other human frailties.
rex,
Come on. Where’s the lie? Bush says in the very same response: “I had not had my final conversation with Don Rumsfeld yet at that point. I had been talking with Don Rumsfeld over a period of time about fresh perspectives. He likes to call it fresh eyes.”
So he had not finalized with Rummy. Read the entire Bush response. Remember you are alleging lie. Y you can find 500 hate sites calling that a lie. But look at the context. Consider Bush’s celebrated lack of articulateness (?). Where’s the lie in this?
Let me just point out also that , applying dugger’s logic, Bill Clinton never committed perjury.
Ever.
So the righties can just shut up about that, too.
“We do not torture” — that’s the worst lie of all. And you know what scarier — that Bush believes it to be true. There’s simply no defending this statement. Either he’s a liar, or he’s completely lost control of the presidency. Terrifying.
Dugger, you need to put another coat of wax on that turd, ok?
Bottom line is he is either a pathological liar or incompetent. Neither of whom should be fit to be the President of the Untied States.
How does that go, Dugger? It ain’t that President Bush is a liar, he’s just real weak on tellin’ the truth.
So, Dugger, you have no answer for any of these on-the-record, patently false, misleading, and intentionally distorted statements?
None of them rises to the level of “lie” in your semantics, right? Would that be because it was GW Bush who said them?
And of course you fall back on the logically inept (but typically wingnut) argument “but Jimmy did it, too” in accusing statements of not being lies because others (Dems) made them.
Your parents should have handled that particularly ridiculous branch of argument when you were four.
Failing that, digest this:
1. Not ALL Dems, in fact only about a third in the House and Congress, voted FOR the October 2002 AUMF. The overwhelming majority of Dems voted AGAINST.
2. The DEMS who voted FOR, voted based on the congressional briefings which have since been found to be manipulated full of lies and distortions by Cheney’s henchmen.
You cannot use that argument, Dugger, much as your side wants to.
duros
Actually Clinton was never convicted for perjury.
And Wellstone,
how in the hell do you explain all of the WMD and ‘we must do somethinfg about Saddam’ quotes before Bush took over. Evil Cheney do that to??
Ex
“He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983.”
-Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
Why just look at what evil Bushco made poor SandyBurglar do in 1998. Man. Were they evil or what!
SandyBurglar lying, Wellstone?
1998. Pretty much says it all. Quotes quotes quotes. Now do something useful:
Put together that list of Iraqi WMD claims the Bush Administration made that turned out to be TRUE
What you are doing is regurgitating a bunch of irrelevant crap that has no bearing. Did Clinton’s administration invade Iraq? No. Did the information and intelligence and situation on Iraq change since 1998? Yes.
GET TO WORK.
duros
Actually Clinton was never convicted for perjury.
Yes, dugger, I am aware of that. Please explain that to your pals who seem unaware of the distinction.
Perhaps I misspoke. I meant to say Clinton never lied.
from Dugger:
how in the hell do you explain all of the WMD and ‘we must do something about Saddam’ quotes before Bush took over. Evil Cheney do that too??
Once again, instead of answering the questions and addressing the issue, you deflect.
The simple explanation for the quotes, as you’ve abundantly proven, is that many of them took place YEARS before the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq by the Bush Administration in 2003.
The quote you offer as an “example” was made while the Clinton Administration was justifying its 4-day rain of hundreds of Tomahawk and Cruise missiles on various targets which obliterated, as we now know, all capacity for WMD and WMD programs in Saddam’s Iraq.
The WMD may have existed BEFORE the Clinton intervention, but they sure as Hell were blown off the face of the earth by our superior ordnance and capable military.
And Cheney and Bush knew it, they lied about it, and their Administration’s policy was to demonize, punish, discredit, and destroy if possible any and all who opposed them and stood in the way of their pplans for war.
This can no longer be denied, Dugger.
The quote you offer as an “example” was made while the Clinton Administration was justifying its 4-day rain of hundreds of Tomahawk and Cruise missiles on various targets which obliterated, as we now know, all capacity for WMD and WMD programs in Saddam’s Iraq.
Remember that, Dugger? I think you characterized it as blowing up a couple of tents and a camel. phht, no big deal. Just the Clenis trying to look all tough and shit.
I think Dugger will beg to differ, Wellstone.
He’ll be wrong, but that never stopped him before.
I beg to differ Wellstone. As PedoMD recently pointed out, the ISG concluded that Iraq destroyed all its WMD stockpiles and such by, I believe, 1995.
Remember when someone posted as a Bush lie, a quote taken immediately after the invasion that went something like ‘And when [Saddam] chose to deny inspectors, when he chose not to disclose, then I had the difficult decision to make to remove him.”
Dugger’s defense was based on 1998 too. Even though Bush’s quote was from like 3 or 4 days after the invasion. It’s the 3+3=12 defense.