Should Richard Cheney Resign for His Health?

[Dayle Record]

I never believed that Saddam had WMD. The inspectors didn't find any. But I did believe that this administration had no compunctions about spinning things any way they liked. It should be obvious that this administration didn't believe he had WMD when they outed an agent who disputed their claims. I think that most of the "intelligence" that indicated there were WMD came from the boys who got into the fight, Saddam and George. Boys who get caught fighting, even the worst bullies come up with outlandish, and usually pathetic yarns as to why. If they are having a big fist fight next to the swimming pool, then you know it is over girls. If they get into a fight over by the pie table, then you know it is over pie. If they get into a fight after church, then you know it is about girls and pie, and the situation is hopeless; both should be sent away to camp.

I think Cheney is resigning, because his wife stated that he definitely won't be running for president in 2008. That was a premature statement, most likely a slip of the tongue, that in my opinion indicated some inside knowledge.

 

[Astronuc]

As for Saddam's position, he could not let the UN or the US walk all over him. He probably had some delusional idea that his army could put up a fight - as his generals probably lied to him about the military capability - or they would face execution.

Saddam also had to deal with Iran next door. If he showed weakness, he would have essentially invited another war with Iran (to which Gokul and BobG alluded).

I certainly believe for the good of the Iraqi people, the Middle East, and the world, that Saddam and his sons (Uday and Qusay) had to go. I however, strongly disagree with the method or way the Bush administration went about it. It has proved costly in terms of the economic burden, and more importantly for the lost lives of the service people and innocent Iraqis.

I strongly recommend reading Ritter's book in order to get his perspective. One does not have to agree with him, but he has first hand knowledge, and I believe his perspective is pretty much on the mark.

Ritter makes an important point with respect to the current situation in Iraq. The insurgency is NOT originating from outsiders, but rather Baathists in Iraq, i.e. it's homegrown resistance to the US. These people believed (and still do) in a secular and unified Iraq, although and unfortunately, it was dominated by a Sunni minority and an autocratic nut. Minority control of any population is unacceptable.

 

[Tide]

faust9: No problem. I remember at the time reading about the positions of Arab leaders (from credible and reliable sources) but I don't record these things. For my earlier post I just picked the first 3 that showed up on a Google search. At any rate, it's just not a fact that there was no concern in the Arab world over Saddam's WMDs. They certainly expressed that concern but they also publicly objected to "invasion." It seems that's the way it is in that part of the world.

Don't bother digging through Lexis. I don't have a horse in this race! :)

PattyLou, Astronuc: Indeed, there is a lot that gets lost or swept away and complicated issues are reduced to political slogans. I am skeptical of "both sides."

 

[Astronuc]

I am skeptical of "both sides."

You and me both!

 

[Smurf]

I am skeptical of "both sides."

I believe that you believe that.

That's about it though.

 

[Smurf]

it would be a far reach to believe any American president would just make up evidence out of thin air.

After all the lies they've told you, after the dozen or so times they *have* made up evidence out of thin air, you still believe they don't do it...

I don't mean to insult you Bob, but I think that's willfull blindness.

 

[loseyourname]

I think Cheney is resigning, because his wife stated that he definitely won't be running for president in 2008. That was a premature statement, most likely a slip of the tongue, that in my opinion indicated some inside knowledge.

It's funny the way you state that, as if a wife having inside knowledge of her husband's intentions is somehow out of the ordinary.

 

[loseyourname]

After all the lies they've told you, after the dozen or so times they *have* made up evidence out of thin air, you still believe they don't do it...
I don't mean to insult you Bob, but I think that's willfull blindness.

How many times before the ultimatum to Saddam was issued had the Bush administration made up evidence out of thin air? He had only been in office scarcely a year at the time, and you were 14 years old! How closely could you possibly have been following world events back then?

 

[Smurf]

How many times before the ultimatum to Saddam was issued had the Bush administration made up evidence out of thin air? He had only been in office scarcely a year at the time, and you were 14 years old! How closely could you possibly have been following world events back then?

I started following politics when Bush was elected. But regardless, I wasn't talking about him only, I was talking about the government in general. I doubt (but I havn't researched) that there's a single administration in my lifetime that hasn't made up evidence practically out of thin air.

 

[faust9]

How many times before the ultimatum to Saddam was issued had the Bush administration made up evidence out of thin air? He had only been in office scarcely a year at the time, and you were 14 years old! How closely could you possibly have been following world events back then?

Some event had to be the first. Iraq might have been the first time they fabricated evidence to justify an idea---welcome to the http://www.newamericancentury.org/".

So, if this wasnt their first deceit then what was might I ask? Why does his short time in office somehow make the deciet OK?

 

[BobG]

He had only been in office scarcely a year at the time, and you were 14 years old! How closely could you possibly have been following world events back then?

He could have had a paper route. It's hard to plop that many newspapers on people's doorsteps without absorbing at least a little of what's going on in the world. I still remember delivering the paper the morning after Haldeman, Erlichman, and Mitchell resigned. That's when I finally realized Nixon wasn't going to complete his term of office.

I started following politics when Bush was elected. But regardless, I wasn't talking about him only, I was talking about the government in general. I doubt (but I havn't researched) that there's a single administration in my lifetime that hasn't made up evidence practically out of thin air.

That's pretty cynical, but, then, you are an anarchist.

Assuming a person did believe government could and should be beneficial...

Without some good evidence to the contrary, I think you have to give the President the benefit of the doubt. In fact, when pushed to go one way or the other, most in the Senate (77-23) and most in the House (296-133) had to go ahead and trust that Bush and his staff knew what they were talking about. He's starting to find out how people react when they feel they've been made a fool of.

 

[SOS2008]

Some event had to be the first. Iraq might have been the first time they fabricated evidence to justify an idea---welcome to the http://www.newamericancentury.org/".
So, if this wasnt their first deceit then what was might I ask? Why does his short time in office somehow make the deciet OK?

He was deceitful before that--his entire life--including how he became Governor.

 

[Smurf]

Without some good evidence to the contrary, I think you have to give the President the benefit of the doubt.

What do you mean? Are you suggesting maybe he didn't lie?

In fact, when pushed to go one way or the other, most in the Senate (77-23) and most in the House (296-133) had to go ahead and trust that Bush and his staff knew what they were talking about. He's starting to find out how people react when they feel they've been made a fool of.

Who said the congress was innocent? Unless you think ignorance is an excuse. Then that might excuse ooh... 1/3 of them.

 

[SOS2008]

Who Is Scooter Libby?
The secretive Cheney aide at the heart of the CIA leak case.
By John Dickerson
Posted Friday, Oct. 21, 2005, at 3:57 PM PT
----------
Libby is a neocon's neocon. He studied political science at Yale under former Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz and began working with his former teacher under Cheney at the Defense Department during the George H.W. Bush administration, thinking about grand national security strategy in the post-Cold War era.
----------
If the State Department under Colin Powell hated Dick Cheney, it hated Scooter almost as much, viewing him accurately as a pre-eminent member of the cabal hellbent for war with Iraq. It was Libby who sat with Powell in the final session before Powell's U.N. speech, eyeing every detail to make sure that the Secretary of State didn't water down the case. When Libby talked privately to friends about his rivals at State during the Powell era, it often sounded like the head of one political party speaking about the other, ascribing the worst motives and rarely giving Powell's team the benefit of the doubt.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2128530/?nav=ais

To Richard: You went into Washington University Hospital on Saturday afternoon. It is fall now … In South Dakota where you go pheasant hunting each year; the aspens will already be turning. They turn in clusters, because their roots connect them. If you resign for your health, everyone will understand ...and perhaps Irving will go away too. With deep concern, from American citizens.