Friday, October 13, 2006

A Conservative Response to the Liberal Mantra that Bush Lied About the War:

Without getting into the obvious political divide... democrats believe what they want to believe and nothing anyone can say will change their minds. Here's some food for thought.. Before the war, every major ally in the region including arab ones, advised that he (Saddam Hussein) was actively seeking to obtain nuclear weapons. During this entire time he systematically and repeatedly refused to allow U.N. inspectors to survey Iraqi facilities despite the requirements of the cease fire agreement following the Gulf War.

On top of that, you have a notably Liberal leader of Great Britain who has unfettered access to all of the intelligence of MI6 (the foremost intelligence service in the world since World War II, with significant arab contacts) agreeing to the proposed invasion. Something in that intel scared Blair's socks off, so much so that he threw his political career into the fire, I'd say the mark of a true leader who knows he's got to act regardless of the political cost because the danger is too great to ignore.

Finally, although no nuclear weapons have been found, there have been repeated findings of chemical and biological agents (which were also prohibited and are classified as weapons of mass destruction). I could care less if you (liberals) want to stick your head in the sand and convince yourself that this President is your worse nightmare, but at least have the integrity to just admit, you hate the man instead of concocting tenuous and unsupported allegations of falsehood on his part.

The true difference between conservatives and democrats comes down to this.... Conservatives are willing at great cost to do what is right and give foreign people a chance at the liberty we take for granted. Liberals give good face time to lofty ideals but refuse to defend those freedoms from obvious threats or to even agree that the U.S. must at times (not always) pay the price and stand up to evil because the rest of the world cannot or will not. Pacificism will always embolden dictators and tyrants, World War II should have taught us that lesson. The truth is that there are evil men in this world who will go as far as you allow them to go, you will have to stand up to them at some point.. the question is whether you do so now or at greater cost later.

My tyrade above was in response to the following email on my university email service:

> You could do all the research imaginable and still not know if a> candidate is lying or has a hidden agenda, in which case we don’t> deserve the disastrous consequences.> > It’s only partially true if you reelect a President after you find out> he misrepresented the evidence leading up to War. Even then, all> those solders who die or lost an arm, leg or had their face blown off,> didn’t deserve what they got.> > Peace.

It's not surprising that people can't see the truth when they hold to the naive notions that there are no truly evil people in this world.. except for the latest conservative leader. The saddest part of this type of thinking is that they run the risk of allowing these truly evil people to succeed. In the end, they would deny them the very liberties that they so loudly hail. - Jay

2 Comments:

At 5:10 PM, Blogger Kat said...

Amen, Jay. It is one of my pet frustrations that the "Bush lied, people died" mantra still gets such traction--despite the clear and obvious evidence to the contrary. I think one of the things that it comes down to is that some people want to equate the claim Bush lied to the known fact that Clinton lied under oath--and they want to up the stakes, so that Clinton's lying looks innocent by comparison. It's mental gymnastics so that they can keep their illusions about what a great man Clinton is, and the golden age of liberalism that was the 90s, somehow intact, and they diminish the importance of character in the process. At it's core, it's emotionalism, not rationality, and that's why the evidentiary arguments don't make a dent.

 
At 9:14 AM, Blogger Jay said...

Kat,

I hadn't thought of it in that context but you may have something there. Its emotionally trying for people when their heroes fall, and for the liberals they were so desperate for his presidency to be significant that they are still agonizingly trying to find ways to minimize his failures so that his accomplishments are the legacy he so desperately wanted.
Thanks again for sharing!
Jay

 

Post a Comment

<< Home