Imminent , Shimminent: Did you argue Iraq posed a threat, Mr. Resident?

[darkstar]

That's what Russert should ask Sunday, and other whores should be asking daily, nightly, what have you.

We shouldn't get caught up in imminence either. Did you say Iraq was a threat or not, dumbass? Were you wrong or not? So all those dead people, their citizens, our sons and daughters, that was "your bad," right?

Keep the fous on the idea of Iraq as a threat and, hence, if the war was warranted. Oh, you still maintain they were? If so, how so?



Unfortunately, not as easy as it sounds. A collective interview w/ Bush and his cronies in coming weeks and the smoke they will blow:


"Imminence aside, did you say Iraq was a threat to U.S.?"

No.Yes. It may have seemd that we said it that was or perhaps you all in the press inferred it, but, again, yesno.

"Does it appear increasingly more likely that you were wrong, that their never were WMD?"

But that was never our whole case. Evil, brutal regime. Had to go.

"But America's argument to world, via Powell at UN, was about WMD, not Saddam's repressive state."

Well, it was because that was the most compelling evidence we had to work with before the world body, you see, at that time, even though we now may be, in fact, undershtanding that shometimes, perhaps, you see, there can be flaws in the vashly complicated gathering of intelligence proschess.

"But flawed intelligence and imminence aside, if there were no WMD then Saddam never could have given them to terrorits either, correct?"

Well, that would be correct if it turns out to be the case that we ultimately, that is, across the dext decade, do not, in fact, find any WMD. So the jury is still out on that one at this particular juncture which is really, after all, only a snaphot in time.

"And you yourself have said, along with Ms. Rice, Mr. Powell, Mr. Rumfeld, and Mr. Cheney that Saddam had absolutely nothing to do with 911, correct?"

Again, with intelligence the way it is, more flawed than we as a nation at any time in our hishtory have perhaps ever undershtoood, that is what currently the case at hand appears perhaps to be, but with what we know now about these flaws, there does, of course exist the posshibility that Saddam did, in fact, posshibly have hand in it.

"But to the best of your current state of knowlege, sir, Saddam did not play a role in 911, nor did he have WMD, and, hence, no ability to hand them off to terrorists."

Well that's a shubtle question that takes us into questions of nashunal security arenas, but at this point, although its to shoon to say, I'd venture to answer that again, with a definitive "yesno."

[sallyseven]

1. Dream on

Russett doesn't want to know the truth. He is a bush butt kisser.

[JanMichael]

2. Heh. We posted similar threads.

I'm as befuddled by this "imminent" crap as I am by the Super Bowl halftime show.

[StClone]

3. Two things

"Imminent" is an important word because if he did say imminent and the the non-cherry-picked facts proved otherwise that is a violation of the Constitution. That would be, shall I say, treasonous. That is why they push so hard to make the point that Bush did not say the word, appearances aside.

Second point is that the Flying Monkey Minions are working hard in as many ways as possible to paint Iraq as very dangerous radiative
caged mouse. Listen to all the wingers flapping vigorously, feigning deep fears with a raucous "cock-a-doodle-doo." They want to wake us to the fact that Saddam had this WMD and was working on that nuke. But our eyes and ears work fine...

[darkstar]

4. Good points.

However, isn't bending facts re: the threat in general just as treasonous? That is, the argument was the threat then Iraq posed would only grow larger. The "growing larger" was sheer speculation about an unknown future; "threat" was about present capabilities, and they stated over and over that Iraq was a threat due to their current capabilities. They turn out not to have had such. Isn't that distortion, by itself, an equal crime?

[John BigBootay]

5. Do any pariah nations pose a threat to the U.S.? n/t