Who here believes that our President let the US to war on ';false pretenses'; like this story claims?

Give your reasons why you believe he lied, or why you don't.





Study: Bush led U.S. to war on 'false pretenses'


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22794451/fro鈥?/a>Who here believes that our President let the US to war on ';false pretenses'; like this story claims?
George Bush acted on the intelligence that was available to him. As did the Congress when they authorized the ';Use of Force';. The intelligence may have been faulty as we did not find massive stockpiles of weapons after the invasion, but it does not constitute a lie on the part of the President. Saddam Hussein made every attempt to obfuscate and deter proper inspections. He repeatedly violated UN resolutions and sanctions. In short he went to great lengths to present the idea that he did possess these weapons and had something to hide.





As a result, the threat posed by Iraq became a widely held belief by not only Democrats and Republicans of the day, but also numerous other foreign heads of state. This fact is adequately borne out in ';on the record'; statements made. Some people now wish to use hindsight information 5 years later to attempt to illustrate lies. This is dishonest and the motives of the authors of the study should be examined closely. Then the study should be given the burial it deserves. I am not a Bush fan, but this whole study is a farce and an exercise in futility.





My biggest problem with this whole thing is that it only seeks to indict the current administration, rather than examining the entire history of the conflict. It might have more credibility if it questioned what led to George Bush's actions, but that is the not the goal. There is no attempt to determine the truth. It is instead just another weak attempt at slander.





I will give the people who believe this their chance to show they believe in truth though. Stop looking at the issue with selective blinders and start finding all the fault, including why Bill Clinton also believed this to be true and engaged in bombings of Iraq based on that belief. Before anyone tries to rewrite history on this issue take time to read the link. It is a speech which Clinton gave regarding why he was bombing Iraq. Sounds eerily like George Bush's speech in his prelude to attack regarding Iraq. Try as they might they cannot erase the public record, or the memory of some people.Who here believes that our President let the US to war on ';false pretenses'; like this story claims?
Its a ridiculous charge worthy of only left wing blogs and on the democrat campaign trail talking to such people that buy that nonsense. Lets not forget who stood on the senate floor and made the case for WMD's and war in Iraq; John Kerry and Hillary Clinton. (which last I checked werent ';bushies';)





We had all the same intel the other foriegn govts pertaining to WMD's which stated Hussien had leftover WMD's from 91 and was trying to make more. All this intel was included in the french and Russians who eventually opposed the war politically but knew what we did; Iraq was a threat.





The fact is the middle east is a better place without Saddam and hopefully our efforts in Iraq will yield fruit with time to come. Our strong foreign policy in the last 100 years WORKS. The last I saw, Germany and Japan werent still trying to take over the globe. And our last biggest threat in communism was dealt a serious blow by the collapse of the soviet union as we knew it.
Only the guy who commissioned the story, George Soros, and of course, his little puppet minions.
I don't believe he lied, but I know that many things he said (some 900 things) were not true. When questioned about the accuracy of his information, Bush and his administration refer to the intelligence agencies. If it was lies, I think the intelligence agencies would come out and say so. Instead, I think they got bad information which was over-hyped.
I really don't think that the general public really knows or understands why wer are at war. There is much that goes on behind closed doors that we are not told or aware of.
More than a thousand instances of lying, and the purpose was money and oil. 3000 people died to give GW Bush an excuse to make his pals rich.





The man is just taking up space.
The intel that led to the war was incorrect. Some of it was Hussein's fault, saying he had more of the weapons that he'd already used on the Kurds. The US and England had the same info, Congress received the same info and everyone thought it was factual. Congress voted for the war as well as the UN. When it was discovered the info was inaccurate the dems (in order to cover their own butts) started accusing Bush and Cheney of lying in order to go to war. That's it in a nutshell.
I don't believe that for a minute. And who's to say they're no WMDs buried there now? it is a mighty big desert you know.





What I do believe is, we have journalists with agendas.
Bro some of us have been saying that since 2002.
Of course he did. They were sooooooooo sure of Iraq building nukes....and they were not. That is a lie
even after this much so far no wmd.that means he was misleading the people
Without a doubt he did. And there is a mountain of evidence that proves the point. Call it misleading to make you feel good.
EVERYONE who's been paying attention to ANYTHING serious over the past 7 years knows that Bush has lied about EVERY ISSUE since he became President and has taken the U.S. downhill on everything -- International relations, economy, education, health care . . . and on and on and on . . . without question, one of the worst leaders of any nation in world history.


Thankfully, just 362 days to go!
THIS BULLSH*T STORY COMES FROM TWO GROUPS FUNDED BY NOTED BUSH HATER %26amp; CRIMINAL GEORGE SOROS. CONGRESS FULLY AUTHORIZED THE WAR. IT SEEMS THE LIBERALS HERE HAVE FORGOTTEN THAT POINT. THE ILLEIGENCE WAS NOT ONLY OURS BUT MI-6 FROM ENGLAND ALONG WITH WHAT TODAY PASSES FOR RUSSIAN INTELLIGENCE.


WHEN CLINTON WAS PRESIDENT THERE WAS TALK ABOUT SADAAM HUSSEIN HAVING WMDS.
we already knew he lied before this article came out, no weapons of mass destruction, no ties to bin laden, yes saddam was a dictator and a tyrant but it looks to me like that is the only way to keep peace in that country just look how out of control iraq is now if saddam were still alive just one of those roadside bombs goes off and he would send in troops wiping out the entire neighborhood that seems to be all the people over there understand is violence they dont want diplomacy or peace talks but kill everything moving dig a mass grave bury the town..then they get the point, it will take another saddam like character to stop the violence in iraq...sad but true
I believe that there may be some claims that have not appeared to be proven out. For example, we all believed he has WMDs, even back to the Clinton administration, but we have not found stockpiles of them. Did Hussien move them, hide them, destroy them, or did he never have them and just gave all appearances that he did? We may never know. Do I think the President knowingly and intentionally led us to war on information he knew to be false? Absolutely not.
If I could play the stock market today with the wisdom that only tomorrow brings, I'd be a billionaire!





This ';935'; figure is so bogus. It means that if Bush makes the same speech 100 times, they count it like 100 different instances.





How about John Kerry, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, and all the others that claimed the same thing about Iraq's WMD's? Let's add their ';lies'; together, and maybe get a grand total of 3,126.





Everyone believed the intelligence we had... and don't forget: Russia, Germany, France, they all said Iraq had these weapons.





Bush did not lie. To (quote or mock, it's up to your own interpretation) what the British said about Tony Blair's similar involvement in the Iraq war, he didn't ';sex up'; the figures. This was the intelligence everyone was working with. Our intelligence jived with what the Russians and others knew to be true.





In any case, we will discover some day that Bush not only did not lie, but he was totally correct. Saddam moved those weapons to Syria.
Notice it was a 527 group that made the claim. No mention of the resolutions. Cease fire agreement what about that?


Gibberish from the left again.
...I will believe the ';false pretenses'; line right after I believe Clinton's tryst with Lewinski was a first.


...President Bush had the same sources and information as everyone else, and many of those ';tolerant'; people who believed and supported the same action, are now attacking the President - a bunch of phony-bolony liberals who hate him, they hate America, and they hate those who stand against tyranny and terrorists. And a pitiful shame that they want American to lose, and at the same time they pretend to support our troops (not!).
we've been saying this for years now!
I always have believed that! all war are staged for money, in this case to protect oil fields and reserves!, same reason we went to all the trouble to go to desert storm!!!! boy oh boy the bushes know how to spend it don't they? Don't forget it runs in the family, and the bushes and clintons I'm sure are all related!!!! l.o.l.
You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all the people some of the time, but MSNBC and the left leaning jounalists do not fool me.





We have hashed this out many times before. Everyone believed the intelligence, and there probably was some truth to it.





Why did Saddam stall for so long? There is some subtance to the theory that the WMD's were in fact moved to Syria by plane. (Sorry I do not have the link at the moment)





Didn't the UN and the Brits also believe the reports? There always was danger in the Middle East, and there still is.





Hopefully Iraq will maintain a modicum of stability soon. They certainly are achieving it more and more.





I do not believe all that I read, and MSNBC is one of the last places I look for the truth!





~
Every thinking person must admit that we were either lied to or our leaders had no idea why we were going to war.The decision to go to war requires a great deal more thought than what was put into it.
You are either for me or against me,,,I am the decider on Iraq,I will decide. ahhh like he did much more than lie to drag America and other nation into the B.S he dreamed out his ***%26lt;mouth%26gt;,let the viewer delete me as with the word but ut fits...F.P
He lead America to war, based on the information he had at the time.





Their are a lot of stories about what happened to the WMD, that just about every nation said Saddam had.





Some say Russian spenzt natz teams removed them. ( A lot of evidence supports this claim)





Some say they where moved to Syria ( A Israeli newspaper had a store, about 40 something large cargo planes going back and forth between Iraq and Syria on March 19th 2003.)





Some say, Iraq still has them- buried in the vast desert of sand- waiting for them to degrade and never be found again.





Some say we already found them- i read a few years ago, that between 2003-2005 300 Chemical warheads, and bombs where found- although severely degraded. It made the news, but only lasted for a few days.





Based on past stories, i do not trust MSNBC enough to get my news from them- to many false reporting for me to trust them.
bush lied. Deny the reality all you want. The FACTS won't change.
This gets old...Clinton,Kerry...intel from around the world.. said......oh the hell with it...the scariest part is that some of thes dumb a's are registered voters
No one with any sense believes it.
I don't believe he lied since many in other countries with their own intelligence were saying the same things about WMDs. Also during the Clinton Administration our country believed these things also so did they lie no the intelligence was there and the WMDs are somewhere probably Syria based on movements across the borders before the war.
If we want to put all political bias aside, this is what I think . . .





I think Bush saw Iraq as a threat to the region. It had already invaded two of its neighbors, and was now refusing to allow unfettered access for WMD's.





Given that background, I think that prudence demanded that something had to be done about Saddam, and Bush thought the best solution was to get rid of his regime. Therefore, like anyone else trying to strengthen his argument, he chose to emphasize information that would support his decision to go in. When it turned out that the information was not as reliable as he had previously believed, people who did not want to go in questioned the decision.
yeah he's a dumb man who has forced good americans,british and god forbid australian soldiers 2 die for nothing!