Usa Lies Yet Again

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear all,

The US (and UK0 Claimed that the 'real and credible threat of WMDs' was the impetus for invasion. Then they said, no, we meant regime change after no evidence of WMD's were forthcoming. Fabricated evidence, misleading the public and breaking international law were the foundations of the Iraqi invasion.

Many people, even some of my friends that despise the US, said 'oh well, it might be a good thing for Iraq in the long run. The US (and the right-wing) say 'It has all been about democracy, and freeing the Iraqi people. Yet we find out now that democracy is not high up on the US' 'things to do list'.

Meanwhile, Iraq's top cleric, Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Husseini al-Sistani, demanded the country's next parliament be elected and not chosen by local caucuses, an idea at odds with U.S. plans for returning sovereignty to the Iraqis by July 1.

Al-Sistani, whose views are highly influential among Iraq's Shiite majority, said Sunday the current U.S. plan to have regional caucuses select members of a provisional national assembly would give birth to an illegitimate Iraqi government.

"This will, in turn, give rise to new problems and the political and security situation will deteriorate," al-Sistani said in a statement released by his office in the holy Shiite city of Najaf, south of Baghdad.

source:By NADIA ABOU EL-MAGD, Associated Press Writer

[righturnonred]

we meant regime change after no evidence of WMD's were forthcoming.

Regime change has been the offical policy towards Iraq since the Clinton Administration. This strategy was not invented by Bush and his oil men down in Texas.

Fabricated evidence, misleading the public and breaking international law were the foundations of the Iraqi invasion.

Yes, as you've posted literally hundreds of times, this is what you believe to be the case. However, although the intelligence may have been faulty, an assertion that is premature at best, their is absolutely no evidence to suggest that evidence was manufactured and used to mislead the American people.

If it is found that Bush has mislead the nation with conjured evidence, I will be the first to admit his wrong doing. But you are way to eager to jump on the conspiracy bandwagon and dump on Bush and this administration based soley on emotion, absent any evidence whatsoever.

Yet we find out now that democracy is not high up on the US' 'things to do list'.

Al-Sisanti's comments are obvious politcal grandstanding.

Of course the US wants to hand over sovereignty to the Iraqis as soon as possible, but to do so prematurely would endanger the progress that has been achieved there. The solidity of the Iraq is extremely precarious. A strong central leader is needed to prevent a divided nation from fracturing, a circumstance that would be disastrous for Iraq and for the war on terror.

The United States is not about to sacrifice American lives and spend billions to liberate Iraq just to hand over control as soon as possible to a weak government that will precipitate the balkanization of the country. The US cannot simply withdraw immediately. Our presence is needed there for the forseeable future to ensure the survival of Iraq and to further our goal of moderization and political reform in the region. The US will withdraw as soon as it is viable, and not according to the time table of sanctimonious France or the dictate of some Iraqi religious fundamentalist vying for power.

Just for once Flea, think, don't feel.

[SirRiff]

Al-Sisanti's comments are obvious politcal grandstanding.

which is so different from bushs way of doing things....karl rove is actually his butler....

[theloniusfleabag]

Dear rightturnonred,

I suppose the UK was more guilty of fabricating evidence than the US in the WMD spectrum.

But you are way to eager to jump on the conspiracy bandwagon and dump on Bush and this administration based soley on emotion, absent any evidence whatsoever.

There is a fine line between 'consipacy theories' and 'assessments of the National Security Council'. Often the difference is 'classified in the interests of National Defence.' While 'evidence' is difficult to come by, especially for those not cleared for official reports, the truth most often comes out later.

I suppose I only have the track record of the US on which to judge them. Pres. G.H.W. Bush lied often, and was only caught at it later. Pres. Reagan forgot his wrongdoings. I suppose credit should go to Pres. GW. Bush for keeping his illegal actions out in the open.