Friday, February 19, 2016

Trumped by Iraq

   Well, here we go again, Trump has once again stuck his foot in his mouth with the Iraq War. First off everyone knows that George W. Bush and Company set up the  reasons for invading Iraq so they lied in their accusations in order to have viable reasons to invade. There have been several reasons why this was done but the main reason was that those at the head of our government  through administrations following the first Iraq war under Bush41 felt that regime change would be the best thing for Iraq. President Clinton considered regime change in Iraq during his administration but an invasion was not in his repertoire and his main way for doing that was supporting opposition groups in Iraq to topple Saddam. Clinton however did bomb Iraq in 2008  because it refused to cooperate with United Nations (U.N.) weapons inspectors. Clinton’s decision did not have the support of key members of Congress, who accused Clinton of using the air strikes to direct attention away from ongoing impeachment proceedings against him.  
   George W. Bush received all the ammunition he needed to invade Iraq when the World Trade Center came down on Sept 11, 2001. From that point on he built a case on Saddam as part of the reason that the Twin Towers came down. Saddam had no connection to the terrorist attack but he was a terrorist and terrorized his own people and thus he supported terrorist which the Bush administration used to connect him to terrorists. Then there were the weapons of mass destruction including both biological and chemical and now Bush tried the nuclear connection to make a more compelling reason to bring him down. All those reasons turned out to be false so they did lie about the reason for bringing down the Saddam regime and invading Iraq.  
   Trump wasn't lying about Bush43 concocting the reasons for going after Saddam but Republicans do not criticize their own leaders in this manner and that job is left to the opposing party. As a result Trump is not considered a true conservative who wouldn't criticize his own in the manner that he did. Trump may have told the truth about Bush43 but when he started saying that he was against Bush43 even before the invasion of Iraq, it turns out he lied. It seems that he was interviewed by by none other than his NY buddy, Howard Stern before the war and he clearly states that yes he is in favor of the invasion. After the war started and it looked like it was a bad decision he then decided to switch sides. If Donald Trump had been either a Republican or Democrat voting for the war in Iraq in 2003 he would have voted yes. Seems that he switches sides a lot and that is his MO.   
   Many people supported The Bush Administration and its decision to invade Iraq and then later regretted that decision, among them Hillary Clinton. Hillary was too close to the decision makers in her husbands administration and felt that Saddam needed to be replaced and thus her decision to support the war effort. Bernie Sanders on the other hand had reasons to vote no and oppose the Republican decision to invade. Does this one decision disqualify Hillary from being President, no. You could say the same thing about Trump supporting the Iraqi war before the invasion, does that disqualify him to be President, no. The main difference here is that Trump kept saying that he was against the war before the invasion and that is a total fabrication. He lied just like Bush43 lied. Do we want to elect someone who will go to any length to get elected and that includes lying. I wouldn't want someone like that running my country and like Bush43 he has disqualified himself not because of his support for the war but because of his lying about it.

No comments:

Post a Comment