What are they hiding?

Absolutely

Apples = sex
Oranges = needless deaths of american soldiers, combined with loss of international credibility.

They're not even close.

 

The way I see it, any semi-sophisticated American saw that the WMD excuse was a sham. I think Iraq was more about sending a message as to US' seriousness in dealing with this 'war on terror'. It was a strategic move to put us within a stone's throw of Iran, Syria and others. You may disagree on the strategy but that's what our leadership decided. I hope it works out how they calculated, hopefully future peace.

 

Nixon was on the road to impeachment for his boys doing a burglary.

Clinton was on the road to impeachment for having oral sex, then lying about it.

Bush sends Americans to their death on the pre-text of a lie.

There were no WMD, and Iraq did not impose a threat to the US. If so, some weapons would have been found, credible witnesses would have come forward, or Bushies would have presented appropriate evidence.

They've lied and killed. Now they are lying some more.

The only problem with impeaching Bush is that it gives us President Cheney. They all need to be voted out, from Senator Feinstein on up.

 

See, the Bushes aren't stupid. Quayle, Cheney. See a pattern? Any guesses about Jeb's future running mate?

 

Yea, and how much did the Republicans force our country to spend on that inquiry??

How can they look the American people in the eye and say that this is not worth looking into??

 

Dante, you've apparently forgotten that the perma-probe began as an inquiry into Whitewater. The Clintons were cleared on that in '95 or '96 by the RTC. And they were cleared on Travelgate. And....you get the point. The only thing that stuck was the Monica thing.

To put it another way, you're wrong. What would have saved money is if the NYT had not regurgitated lies fed them by the Arkansas Project, and had done some independent reporting, and never started us down that whole road.

 

Does anybody seriously believe the Bush Administration would fabricate evidence of WMDs knowing they would have to produce them sooner or later?

Go ahead, have your little hearing. What do you think is going to be found besides the fact the CIA was so weakened by the Clinton years that the intelligence was poor and unreliable. Be careful what you wish for.

 

I for one, would be happy to see evidence of things the Clinton administration did that weakened our security.

What, you would rather not be invormed of such things? What a ************ed up way to view (see no evil) your government.

I am not sure if anyone here is saying that evidence was manufactured. But I'd like to know if evidence was viewed selectively in order to convince the american public that this was not only a good war, but a just one as well.

Bush has been praised for his selection of this particular cabinet. I'd like to know if they misled him.

 

I would, too.

Personally I could care less about Clinton. He is in the history books. If there are structural problems, they need to be fixed. Notice that Bush did not fire anyone for 9/11 or anyone for the poor intelligence on WMD in Iraq. The reason is simple. Bush thinks everyone is doing their jobs correctly.

Powell is the worst secretary of state since Kissinger. After 9/11 we had the world's sympathy. Now, our coalition of the willing looks pretty wack. Will Blair last the year? Wow, such statesmanship. He couldn't organize a trip to the bathroom.

Rumsfeld is a good friend of Saddam's and a happy trade partner with N. Korea, particularly with regard to nuclear technology. He said he knows exactly where the WMD are, between Tikrit and Baghdad. Well, where are they?

Ashcroft and his FBI pretty much new everything except the flight numbers on 9/11. Sure, blame Clinton. If that is case, why even bother supporting Bush, since all you need to do is blame someone else. Is your phone tapped, yet?

Fiscal responsibility has tanked. We went from surplus under Clinton to really large deficits.

Economic growth is not there. No real teeth in pursuing corporate mismanagement. Remember that Cheney at Halliburton defrauded investors by overstating income by $450M in 1999/2000.

Christian, moral leadership? Doesn't all the mismanagement and misleading info get you right wingers pissed off?

Bush and his cabinet are pretty much trashing things. And no, he won't remember all the little people that supported him.

 

The funniest part of that article is where Pat Roberts calls the democrat demand for an inquiry nothing more than "politicizing." He made this claim at a press conference on his committee's decision. Not one Democrat on the committee was invited to the press conference.

 

Hey, I don't want to overstate it. But I am starting to get more and more interested about what this administration is doing. I have given Bush lots of leeway -- these are extraordinary times we are in. And frankly, I am willing to give him lots of leeway on the WMD front. He just had planes smash into the WTC and for the sake of the American people, I think he had a right to be just a bit over cautious about security matters.

However, he decided that he would barter the future good will of other nations for the present. In other words, he has decided that it was okay to make things harder for this administration and future administrations when it comes to getting the trust of other nations. That's fine, maybe it will prove to be worth it.

But whe you look at his tax policy, you also see that he is willing to barter the future well being of the country for momentary (electoral) benefits. He is buying into the right wing philosophy of not worrying about balancing the budget and not worrying about social programs -- after all, government can't run social programs, can they. May as well make it more difficult for future administrations to try to get government to work.

It looks to me like it could be a dangerous lack of forethought. And if that's the case, then I want to see if there is any evidence that this guy really is a cowboy.

 

This assumes that the actual objective of the war was the eradication of WMD. Irrespective of political fallout, the administration has already accomplished its objectives of establishing a significant presence from which to expand its military dominance and special economic interests in the region. As a happy consequence, the administration’s associates have ready access to the most profitable oil reserves on the planet. Why would the boys at Halliburton, Fluor, Bechtel, Perle, Wolfowitz, et al give a damn about their pasty taking some heat? They got theirs, and nobody's gonna take it away.

On the immediate political level, its only logical for the administration to count on the same percentage of the nation that was too gullible and/or apathetic to call bull$hit when it committed us to an entirely unprovoked war to be just as lazy and gullible to actually hold it accountable AFTER the fact. And so far, they're right. If enough of you Reps keep zealously advocating on its behalf, the administration will indeed skate, effectively thwarting the good ol' conservative value of accountability, and y'all can call it hard fought victory on behalf of freedom.

The Shrub is a stooge. Which may partly explain why the GOP didn’t push McCain harder for the nomination, even though most polling data indicated that he would have actually BEATEN Gore in an election. But McCain is nobody's beyotch. So instead we have this. A Shrub. In a quagmire. I know how conservatives love that word. QUAGMIRE. Say it.

 

I guess Republicans just don't want to be held accountable for their misleadership skills. I mean, we have a poster on these boards who thinks Clinton is our president. If Clinton's CIA screwed up the intelligence, then Clinton's military won the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. Can't have it both ways.

But alas, Clinton is not our president.