• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Impeachment?

roflpublican said:
hmmm? wmds in iraq? no? k.
Click to expand...

He wasn't lying, he was quoting the conclusions of published intelligence reports from here in the US, as well as from intelligence agencies abroad.

A lie is a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive. Those reports ended up being inaccurate, making what he said about Iraq's WMD false. But since he didn't know at the time they weren't accurate, and there's never been one shred of credible evidence indicating otherwise, there was no intent to deceive on his part... Therefore, president Bush did not lie.

False statement + intent to deceive = Lie
False statement - intent to deceive = Incorrect statement or mistake

See the difference?
 
Grim17 said:
He wasn't lying, he was quoting the conclusions of published intelligence reports from here in the US, as well as from intelligence agencies abroad.

A lie is a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive. Those reports ended up being inaccurate, making what he said about Iraq's WMD false. But since he didn't know at the time they weren't accurate, and there's never been one shred of credible evidense indicating otherwise, there was no intent to deceive on his part... Therefore, president Bush did not lie.

False statement + intent to deceive = Lie
False statement - intent to deceive = Incorrect statement or mistake

See the difference?
Click to expand...

nope you can paint poop in the stars and bars and call it a flag but it'd still be poop.
 
We have impeached presidents before. I think like three were. Just got off work. Gonna look it up. At any rate Bush and many on his cabinet were supposedly going to be tried as war criminals and that sham never came to be why would this one?
 
Grim17 said:
He wasn't lying, he was quoting the conclusions of published intelligence reports from here in the US, as well as from intelligence agencies abroad.

A lie is a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive. Those reports ended up being inaccurate, making what he said about Iraq's WMD false. But since he didn't know at the time they weren't accurate, and there's never been one shred of credible evidence indicating otherwise, there was no intent to deceive on his part... Therefore, president Bush did not lie.

False statement + intent to deceive = Lie
False statement - intent to deceive = Incorrect statement or mistake

See the difference?
Click to expand...

Mmm hmmm ... but when Obama reports what's in the intelligence reports ... that's a lie....

Here's the difference, though: Bush was determined to invade Iraq from the beginning. Bush used the intelligence to support a decision he had already made. Bush set up a whole separate intelligence apparatus that he used to stovepipe faulty intelligence that he could use to make his predetermined case. Bush cut off weapons inspections because he knew they were on the verge of declaring Iraq WMD-free. Bush may not have lied, but he did commit a fraud against the American people.
 
roflpublican said:
nope you can paint poop in the stars and bars and call it a flag but it'd still be poop.
Click to expand...

Let's see what we can conclude here... According to the dictionary, a lie is a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive.

Since there's never been any evidence or sworn testimony indicating Bush quoted intelligence reports he knew to be false, and knowing this you still insist that Bush lied about those WMD, according to the dictionary what does that make your statement?

The irony is simply delicious.
 
Grim17 said:
Let's see what we can conclude here... According to the dictionary, a lie is a false statement made with deliberate intent to deceive.

Since there's never been any evidence or sworn testimony indicating Bush quoted intelligence reports he knew to be false, and knowing this you still insist that Bush lied about those WMD, according to the dictionary what does that make your statement?

The irony is simply delicious.
Click to expand...

lol mate just come clean. bush lied. everyone knows it now. it's not a secret.
http://warisacrime.org/node/6981
 
roflpublican said:
lol mate just come clean. bush lied. everyone knows it now. it's not a secret.
Click to expand...

I don't like to classify it as an outright lie, because that makes it seem like Bush knew the truth, yet said the opposite. His admin misled without having all the information. It was a hunch based on blind faith, which was still pretty dangerous.

However, that doesn't absolve him of wrong-doing or make the Iraq war any more legitimate.
 
Cilogy said:
I don't like to classify it as an outright lie, because that makes it seem like Bush knew the truth, yet said the opposite. His admin misled without having all the information. It was a hunch based on blind faith, which was still pretty dangerous.
Click to expand...

dangerous enough for me to not distinguish it from a lie designed solely to mislead me, the entire congress, and the entire rest of the population of america. a lie worthy of a fitting punishment. preferably execution for treason against the national interests of the united states.
 
Cilogy said:
I don't like to classify it as an outright lie, because that makes it seem like Bush knew the truth, yet said the opposite. His admin misled without having all the information. It was a hunch based on blind faith, which was still pretty dangerous.
Click to expand...

It was certainly less innocent than that. I think they knew damned well that they were stretching the truth beyond all credibility.
 
AdamT said:
Mmm hmmm ... but when Obama reports what's in the intelligence reports ... that's a lie....
Click to expand...

If he believed them to be true, then of course not... A lie would be for instance, telling everyone multiple times on world wide television for 2 weeks, that the attack that resulted in the murder of those 4 Americans was the result of anger over a YouTube video, knowing that wasn't the case, and instructing members of your administration to push that false narrative.

Here's the difference, though: Bush was determined to invade Iraq from the beginning. Bush used the intelligence to support a decision he had already made.
Click to expand...

If so, that's not a lie, nor is it an abuse of his power.

Bush set up a whole separate intelligence apparatus that he used to stovepipe faulty intelligence that he could use to make his predetermined case.
Click to expand...

Nice theory... Too bad there's never been any credible evidence, sworn testimony or investigative conclusions that support that alligation.

Bush cut off weapons inspections because he knew they were on the verge of declaring Iraq WMD-free.
Click to expand...

Nice theory... Too bad there's never been any credible evidence, sworn testimony or investigative conclusions that support that alligation.

Bush may not have lied,
Click to expand...

That I can agree with...

but he did commit a fraud against the American people.
Click to expand...

Nice theory... Too bad there's never been any credible evidence, sworn testimony or investigative conclusions that support that alligation.
 
Grim17 said:
If he believed them to be true, then of course not... A lie would be for instance, telling everyone multiple times on world wide television for 2 weeks, that the attack that resulted in the murder of those 4 Americans was the result of anger over a YouTube video, knowing that wasn't the case, and instructing members of your administration to push that false narrative.



If so, that's not a lie, nor is it an abuse of his power.



Nice theory... Too bad there's never been any credible evidence, sworn testimony or investigative conclusions that support that alligation.



Nice theory... Too bad there's never been any credible evidence, sworn testimony or investigative conclusions that support that alligation.



That I can agree with...



Nice theory... Too bad there's never been any credible evidence, sworn testimony or investigative conclusions that support that alligation.
Click to expand...

I suggest you read the 911 report. Lots of credible evidence in there.
 
Cilogy said:
I don't like to classify it as an outright lie, because that makes it seem like Bush knew the truth, yet said the opposite. His admin misled without having all the information. It was a hunch based on blind faith, which was still pretty dangerous.

However, that doesn't absolve him of wrong-doing or make the Iraq war any more legitimate.
Click to expand...

I guarantee you that I have investigated the "bush lied" issue more extensively than every person who's posted on this thread combined. I looked at the video, audio or transcripts, from every interview, speech, press conference and public statement made by president Bush in the lead up to the Iraq war. I only managed to find 1 statement that he had made concerning Iraq's wmd or weapons capabilities, that had not come from our intelligence community and was not supported by any intelligence agency. It was said to a group of reporters one night as he was leaving a speaking engagement, and was acknowledged as a mistake and corrected in the opening minutes of a White House press conference 2 days later, by Bush's Press Secretary.

I don't believe that anyone in his administration misled the pubic at all. I think they made their determination about Iraq and did so in good faith based on the intelligence they were given, and then set out to explain to the American people the basis for that decision. Many times what they said to the public was worse case scenario that was intended to scare people, but it was all based on what the intelligence community was telling them. It was their obligation to make sure the American people understood the possible ramifications of inaction, and personally, I wouldn't have wanted it any other way.

Knowing now that the intelligence wasn't accurate, makes it difficult to remember just how dangerous they believed Saddam was, and easy to now believe we were being misled... But would anyone believe that to be the case if the intelligence ended up being true? I don't think so.

President Bush did what he felt was best for the country, and did so with the support of both the congress and the senate. Was the Iraq war a mistake? Certainly... Was it wrong? Certainly... Did the president engage in any wrong doing in taking us to and executing that war? No.
 
roflpublican said:
dangerous enough for me to not distinguish it from a lie designed solely to mislead me, the entire congress, and the entire rest of the population of america. a lie worthy of a fitting punishment. preferably execution for treason against the national interests of the united states.
Click to expand...

I get it now... You're one of those people who's entire world revolves around political hatred. A person incapable of acknowledging any fact or embracing any truth, that doesn't justify and support their hate.

Sorry, but I prefer honest dialog... Good luck to you
 
AdamT said:
I suggest you read the 911 report. Lots of credible evidence in there.
Click to expand...

I've read it cover to cover more than once, along with the report from the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Robb-Silberman report and Briton's Lord Butler report... Since I don't recall anything from that, or any other report that supports your allegations, I guess you're going to have to point that evidence out to me and prove you are telling the truth... Unless of course there is no such evidence and your just making **** up. In that case, I wouldn't expect you to even bother responding.
 
AdamT said:
I suggest you read the 911 report. Lots of credible evidence in there.
Click to expand...


Grim17 said:
I've read it cover to cover more than once, along with the report from the Senate Intelligence Committee, the Robb-Silberman report and Briton's Lord Butler report... Since I don't recall anything from that, or any other report that supports your allegations, I guess you're going to have to point that evidence out to me and prove you are telling the truth... Unless of course there is no such evidence and your just making **** up. In that case, I wouldn't expect you to even bother responding.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Adam, I found nothing in the 9/11 report that substantiates your allegations. NOTHING

So, are you going to:
1. Retract your allegations?
2. Prove me wrong by substantiating your statements?
3. Do nothing and stand by your false, unsubstantiated nonsense?

The ball is in your court Adam... Show us what kind of man you are.
 
Grim17 said:
I guarantee you that I have investigated the "bush lied" issue more extensively than every person who's posted on this thread combined. I looked at the video, audio or transcripts, from every interview, speech, press conference and public statement made by president Bush in the lead up to the Iraq war. I only managed to find 1 statement that he had made concerning Iraq's wmd or weapons capabilities, that had not come from our intelligence community and was not supported by any intelligence agency. It was said to a group of reporters one night as he was leaving a speaking engagement, and was acknowledged as a mistake and corrected in the opening minutes of a White House press conference 2 days later, by Bush's Press Secretary.

I don't believe that anyone in his administration misled the pubic at all. I think they made their determination about Iraq and did so in good faith based on the intelligence they were given, and then set out to explain to the American people the basis for that decision. Many times what they said to the public was worse case scenario that was intended to scare people, but it was all based on what the intelligence community was telling them. It was their obligation to make sure the American people understood the possible ramifications of inaction, and personally, I wouldn't have wanted it any other way.

Knowing now that the intelligence wasn't accurate, makes it difficult to remember just how dangerous they believed Saddam was, and easy to now believe we were being misled... But would anyone believe that to be the case if the intelligence ended up being true? I don't think so.

President Bush did what he felt was best for the country, and did so with the support of both the congress and the senate. Was the Iraq war a mistake? Certainly... Was it wrong? Certainly... Did the president engage in any wrong doing in taking us to and executing that war? No.
Click to expand...

At least you're acknowledging that Bush could do wrong, that's a big departure from other conservatives around here.

For the record, Bush did not "lie." He believed faulty intelligence that told him what he wanted to hear. Confirmation bias.
 
rocket88 said:
At least you're acknowledging that Bush could do wrong, that's a big departure from other conservatives around here.

For the record, Bush did not "lie." He believed faulty intelligence that told him what he wanted to hear. Confirmation bias.
Click to expand...

It's like I've said on many occasions... I doesn't matter to me if Bush had decided he was going to find a way to invade Iraq even before 9/11, because ultimately the reasons he gave for doing so, were legitimate ones.

You can call it confirmation bias or anything else you like for that matter, but the bottom line is, he didn't manipulate, exaggerate, invent, or cherry pick the intelligence, and that intelligence depicted Iraq as a clear danger that needed to be dealt with. The senate, congress and a clear majority of the American people (according to public opinion poll from the time) also agreed.

It truly sucks that the intelligence community blew it and we went to war unnessisarily... That's something the still bothers me to this day.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom