PolySciFi Blog

Thursday, September 23, 2004


Lies, Damned Lies, and Blog Posts.

Dear Mr. Neel:

Please come back! I miss you so!


Jody, come on, man:

Surreal Pair 1 - War Rationales

  1. "He failed to tell the truth about the rationale for going to war"
  2. "By one count, the President offered 23 different rationales for this war."

I suppose this means that if I rob a bank and provide 23 reasons why I did so, one of which is accurate, then I'm telling the truth?

Surreal Pair 2 - Importance of Combatting Growing Threats

So, um, is either thing Kerry said here inaccurate? I think it is generally agreed that Iran is much closer to acquiring nuclear capabilities than Iraq was. And that's "nuclear capabilities," not "the capability to one day develop nuclear weapons." Iran already has that. It's not surreal to say that Bush isn't following his own stated doctrine when it comes to Iran or North Korea. Put it this way, as Kerry did:

The President often says that in a post 9-11 world, we can’t hesitate to act. I agree. But we should not act just for the sake of acting. I believe we have to act wisely and responsibly.
George Bush has no strategy for Iraq. I do.

Bizarre Line 1 - Value of Allies:

Um, do you really think that Afghani warlords are valuable allies of the U.S. who should be trusted to handle, alone, vital missions like OBL's capture? Hey, I'm happy Tonga joined our coalition, but I wouldn't send them to capture Jeff Foxworthy, much less a wily, wily terrorist.

Bizarre Line 2 - Exploiting 9/11:

Eh. Ok, sure. Though I think Bush was a hell of a lot more shameless at the convention.

Bizarre Line 3 - Nuclear Club:

We're not exactly doing everything we could be to stop NK and Iran, either. Would you deny that we'd have more resources for those two more serious threats if we'd handled Iraq differently?

Bizarre Line 4:

A. "Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists. Alliance with terrorists could allow the Iraqi regime to attack America without leaving any fingerprints...Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof -- the smoking gun -- that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud. "

That's President Bush, October 2, 2002. Would you say that he's characterizing Iraq as an "imminent threat?" Or a "possibly the capability to someday pose a threat if we leave them alone long enough?"

What about this: "We are united in our determination to confront this urgent threat to America. " Is an "urgent" threat imminent? That's Bush, too. Cheney called it a "mortal" threat. Ari Fleischer called it imminent several times.


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?