RKMBs Forums .::Important::. Politics and Current Events "It's not about oil or Iraq..."

The myth that there was no justification for invading Iraq is one of the greatest scams pulled on the global public.

Enemies of the United States continue to win public support for this lie, not through facts, but through endless repetition of their slanderous allegations.
People hear it so often from the anti-Bush liberal media that they think it must be true.
But it isn't.
And because liberals hate Bush, they are eager to believe and perpetuate their lies.

Again, there were 10 resolutions by the U.N., calling directly for Iraq to disarm.

Not just the United States or the Bush administration, but the entire world acknowledged (through 10 U.N. resolutions) Saddam's non-compliance and pursuit of weapons of mass destruction. The intelligence of every nation that investigated Iraq showed that Saddam was at least pursuing WMD's, whether or not he had already stockpiled them.

To say nothing of Saddam's genocide of an estimated 1 million of his own people, whose mass graves are now being unearthed by the "illegal. imperialist" United States.

There is no dispute that Iraq's own military leaders since 1995 have said Saddam had an entire wing of his military devoted exclusively to developing weapons of mass destruction, and hiding WMD's from U.N. inspectors.

There is no dispute that Saddam tossed out U.N. weapons inspectors in 1998. And even after U.N. inspectors returned in 2002, that Saddam and his military jerked them around and never cooperated.

There is no dispute that evidence of development of WMD's was continuing right on up until the March 2003 invasion, and David Kaye's ongoing investigation has shown Iraq was in "material breach" of the 1991 U.N. agreement , where Saddam promised to abandon development of WMD's. Kaye's conclusion is that Saddam had a WMD assembly line ready, to begin WMD production the moment sanctions were lifted and U.N. weapons inspectors were gone.

There is no dispute, according to U.N. inspectors' conclusions, based on Saddam's own military inventory records, that there are thousands of missing WMD missiles that have never been accounted for.

There is no dispute that virtually all the Democrat leaders, including Sen Hilary Clinton and Sen John Kerry, were saying Saddam/Iraq posed an imminent danger, and that Iraq needed to be dealt with as soon as possile, right on up to the march 2003 invasion of Iraq. When they suddenly changed their tune, to attacking Bush, when WMD's were not immediately found, and Saddam Hussein was not immediately captured.
Where is the liberal media (who eagerly report in excruciating detail every last apparent inconsistent statement of Bush and his administration) when it comes to reporting the inconsistency, the hypocrisy, and the cynical unpatriotic ruthlessness, of liberals now condemning the Iraq war?

The argument by liberals (and others who despise the United States) is that "Iraq's threat was not imminent".
Well, to that I say: Look at North Korea and Libya.

Neither North Korea or Libya were seen as "imminent" threats of developing nuclear capability. But there it is, they did. We're extremely fortunate that Libya chose to submit to inspections.

Liberals say Bush should have invaded North Korea first.
But no doubt, if Bush had done that, then liberals would be calling that a "miserable failure" and "disaster" and "illegal action" as well.

Liberals just blindly criticize Bush's actions, no matter what Bush does. There is no patriotism involved in liberals' attacks, there is no greater good in mind, there is no long-term vision.
There is only smear and slander, saying whatever it takes to make Bush look bad, and hoping people will believe the trumped-up allegations.
Liberal smear and slander, their own short-term gain. No matter how much it hurts U.S. interests, or damages U.S. credibility abroad.

And no matter how right, documented, and justified the case is for U.S. action in Iraq.
On the contrary, the case for war is swept under the rug by liberal politicians and the liberal media, undermining the credibility of their own country's actions, for their own partisan political gain.

And the irony is, the liberals are losing anyway.
Or perhaps because of it they're losing anyway.
The public sees the bitterness, the highly speculative and unproven nature of their allegations against Bush, and that liberals truly offer no alternative national vision of the future. Their entire argument is "we hate Bush".
And if all liberals can do is complain and smear, then they truly have no alternative to offer.