.comment-link {margin-left:.6em;}

Generic Confusion

When you leave, my blog just fades to grey
Nu ma nu ma iei, nu ma nu ma nu ma iei

News? Check. Politics? Check. Music? Check. Random thoughts about life? Check. Readership? Ummm.... let me get back to you on that. Updated when I feel like I have something to say, and remember to post it.

Wednesday, February 09, 2005

And people say bloggers get it wrong?

Check out this passage from an article by David Jackson, journalist for the Dallas Morning News:

Critics of the war said they welcomed elections but pointed out that more than 1,400 Americans have died in a country with no weapons of mass destruction and no ties to the 9-11 attacks – primary reasons cited by the Bush administration for the invasion.

These may be reasons critics cite, but they're not the reasons the Bush administration cited. The correct description of these reasons would be "a country that did not demonstrate destruction of its weapons of mass destruction" and "ties to terrorism."

Not having weapons of mass destruction was not enough to suit the terms of the UN resolutions. The weapons had to be destroyed in a verifiable manner, with inspectors determining that they were destroyed. And Saddam had ties with terrorism, including al-Qaeda, even if there is no evidence that he had a direct role in the September 11th attacks.

There are thousands of bloggers, and each and every one can fact-check you.


At 10:29 PM, Blogger honestpartisan said...

Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Dick Cheney, and the man Bush himself repeatedly claimed that Saddam Hussein was on the verge of obtaining nuclear weapons (from the Niger reference to Rice's "mushroom cloud" statement) and labored to blur any distinction between Saddam Hussein and 9/11. The large number of Americans who believed that Saddam was behind 9/11 demonstrates the success of their efforts.

They did not sell the war on the exquisite nuances that you cite. They sold the war with what I would charitably describe as hyperbole.

At 2:08 PM, Blogger Greg said...

Here's one thing that wasn't cloaked in nuance: "We can't trust Saddam Hussein." We trust the United Kingdom with weapons of mass destruction. But Iraq has proven untrustworthy, to the point where we can't take any chances. It was either show complete compliance with UN demands, or face the consequences.

The American people are confused on a lot of subjects, especially when questions are phrased in a misleading manner. The majority probably believe that Clinton was impeached for sexual relations with that woman. The majority believe that Bush said the threat from Iraq was imminent.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home