Unhappy About No Weapons?
Pardon the continued political pundrity folks, but I can't help myself.
During the second presidental debate, Bush said: "I wasn't happy when we found out there wasn't weapons, and we've got an intelligence group together to figure out why."
Obviously he was upset that his rationale for going to war did not pan out to be truthful. Still, he continues to say that it was the right thing to do and given a choice he'd do it all over again.
Strangely though, were his choice of words. I believe the president was responding to the public's outcry for answers, as people are clearly distraught that our movitations were based on faulty intelligence. We aren't, however, upset that there are no weapons. It's great to know that this country was actually not a terror network in the world and we were actually safe all along. What we're really upset by is that you took us to war saying there would be weapons. There's a big difference, and when you speak of intelligence groups, I doubt their mission will be investigating your war.
I've seen this quote mentioned in the news the past few days, but I'm not sure if anybody is reading into it with the questions that have been floating around my head for the last 48 hours. Was he really serious? Was he truly un-happy that they didn't pose a threat? Is he really that so concerned with being right rather than doing what is right?
It's easy to look at this statement both ways, but I think this could be one of the only situations in recent memory where the man was actually telling the truth - he was legitimately unhappy that they didn't find WMDs in Iraq...
Go figure.
During the second presidental debate, Bush said: "I wasn't happy when we found out there wasn't weapons, and we've got an intelligence group together to figure out why."
Obviously he was upset that his rationale for going to war did not pan out to be truthful. Still, he continues to say that it was the right thing to do and given a choice he'd do it all over again.
Strangely though, were his choice of words. I believe the president was responding to the public's outcry for answers, as people are clearly distraught that our movitations were based on faulty intelligence. We aren't, however, upset that there are no weapons. It's great to know that this country was actually not a terror network in the world and we were actually safe all along. What we're really upset by is that you took us to war saying there would be weapons. There's a big difference, and when you speak of intelligence groups, I doubt their mission will be investigating your war.
I've seen this quote mentioned in the news the past few days, but I'm not sure if anybody is reading into it with the questions that have been floating around my head for the last 48 hours. Was he really serious? Was he truly un-happy that they didn't pose a threat? Is he really that so concerned with being right rather than doing what is right?
It's easy to look at this statement both ways, but I think this could be one of the only situations in recent memory where the man was actually telling the truth - he was legitimately unhappy that they didn't find WMDs in Iraq...
Go figure.
posted by Andy at
9:32 PM
<< Home