NationStates Jolt Archive

Even with all the evidence to the contrary Cheney is still maintaining the so-called link between al-Qaida and Saddam. Apparently this comes at the same time that the Defense Department releases a report again saying that no link existed.

I have to wonder why he is still insisting on this. He is simply looking incredibly bad, pathetically insisting on an untenable position. He would be better off pretending that this phantom link was never given to the American people and just shut up.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17975678/

Somebody's got to feed the base. Might as well be Cheney. On a side note, the NY Sun suggested in an editorial the other day that Cheney ought to run for President. Could we get so lucky?

He's like that Iraqi guy who was on TV going all "Their troops are not close to Baghdad!"

Only, that guy was forced to spout such hogwash. :\

The Cheney quote in that article doesn't say that there was a link between al-Qaeda and Saddam. He's saying that al-Qaeda was operating in Iraq.

“He [Abu Musab al-Zarqawi] took up residence there before we ever launched into Iraq, organized the al-Qaida operations inside Iraq before we even arrived on the scene and then, of course, led the charge for Iraq until we killed him last June,” Cheney told radio host Rush Limbaugh during an interview. “As I say, they were present before we invaded Iraq.”

At no point does he mention a link between al-Qaeda and Saddam. Operating in Iraq =/= working with the Iraqi government.

The fact is the republican party is hurting right now, badly. The party took a beating, and they're deathly afraid of the next election.

In both 2000 and 2004 republicans raised a shit ton more money, and those races were extremely narrow. Their money machine is the only thing that got them the presidency, and with Clinton and Obama having combined broken 50 million, the money advantage is going away.

And if, with all their massive fundraising efforts for a reelection of a sitting, wartime president against an uncharismatic elitist jackass the best they can do is a 51/49 split, the idea of losing that is got them running scared.

This is nothing more than "you still believe we are right, right? Please give us more money so we can continue on being right"

Even with all the evidence to the contrary Cheney is still maintaining the so-called link between al-Qaida and Saddam. Apparently this comes at the same time that the Defense Department releases a report again saying that no link existed.

I have to wonder why he is still insisting on this. He is simply looking incredibly bad, pathetically insisting on an untenable position. He would be better off pretending that this phantom link was never given to the American people and just shut up.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17975678/

There's no link.

This is nothing more than "you still believe we are right, right? Please give us more money so we can continue on saying we're right"
I think that's closer to the truth.

At no point does he mention a link between al-Qaeda and Saddam. Operating in Iraq =/= working with the Iraqi government.

I think we all know what he meant here. Even if he actually was arguing that Saddam had no knowledge of these terrorist groups being present (hah), do you expect the average American to understand the subtle difference? He didn't say that there WAS no link to Saddam after all.

I think we all know what he meant here. Even if he actually was arguing that Saddam had no knowledge of these terrorist groups being present, do you expect the average American to understand the subtle difference? He didn't say that there WAS no link to Saddam after all.
I think that's besides the point. If you tried to take Cheney to task over those comments he could easily wriggle out of it by pointing out what I did. If I've learned one thing from political debates on this forum it's never to infer anything from anything. Just go on face value.

I mean, it's not as if you'd have any difficult coming up with another stick to beat Cheney with, is it?

The Cheney quote in that article doesn't say that there was a link between al-Qaeda and Saddam. He's saying that al-Qaeda was operating in Iraq.



At no point does he mention a link between al-Qaeda and Saddam. Operating in Iraq =/= working with the Iraqi government.
Of course, he also leaves out that Zarqawi was operating in the northern no-fly zone and that the US had chances prior to the war to get him and didn't because they felt it would strengthen their case for war against Iraq. Hussein didn't like Zarqawi or al Qaeda, and if he could have gotten to them, he would have. So while there may not have been a full statement of untruth, there was certainly a lie by omission here.

I think that's besides the point. If you tried to take Cheney to task over those comments he could easily wriggle out of it by pointing out what I did. If I've learned one thing from political debates on this forum it's never to infer anything from anything. Just go on face value.

I mean, it's not as if you'd have any difficult coming up with another stick to beat Cheney with, is it?

Hardly. But the fact that he is using al-Qaida and Saddam in the same sentence is just a continuing example of how awful our leaders position must be and how dumb some people must still be. If there anyone who still believes any of this after all than they are so deluded that nothing will bring them back to reality. It just irritates me that Cheney would try to bring this up again and make our government look worse (if that's possible) than it already is.

Hardly. But the fact that he is using al-Qaida and Saddam in the same sentence is just a continuing example of how awful our leaders position must be and how dumb some people must still be. If there anyone who still believes any of this after all than they are so deluded that nothing will bring them back to reality. It just irritates me that Cheney would try to bring this up again and make our government look worse (if that's possible) than it already is.
He doesn't use al-Qaeda and Saddam in the same sentence (unless he did at another point in the interview - I'm just going from the quote in the article), just al-Qaeda and Iraq. I agree with you, it does look like he's trying to link Saddam with al-Qaeda, and it does annoy me that some people will automatically equate Iraq with Saddam without actually properly analysing what they've read/heard. But as I said before Cheney could wriggle out of this one quite easily, which would then just make his accusers look bad.

Yeah but you know, it's over a year til the next election.

I predict some terrorist event will happen, the Republicans can look justified again, and they will gain just enough votes in just the right places to win the election. Because people are stupid. Mark my words.

Why do Americans buy this crap? Why? :confused: We have the same kind of people over here, only we call them nationalists and don't vote for them.

He doesn't use al-Qaeda and Saddam in the same sentence (unless he did at another point in the interview - I'm just going from the quote in the article), just al-Qaeda and Iraq. I agree with you, it does look like he's trying to link Saddam with al-Qaeda, and it does annoy me that some people will automatically equate Iraq with Saddam without actually properly analysing what they've read/heard. But as I said before Cheney could wriggle out of this one quite easily, which would then just make his accusers look bad.

Sure he could escape his comments if pressured by the media but anyone with a semi-functioning brain knows what he was trying to imply. It makes the U.S. look bad for those who pay attention even if the American media decides to forget this ever happened.

Sure he could escape his comments if pressured by the media but anyone with a semi-functioning brain knows what he was trying to imply. It makes the U.S. look bad for those who pay attention even if the American media decides to forget this ever happened.
Actually, it makes the US look worse. ;)

The Cheney quote in that article doesn't say that there was a link between al-Qaeda and Saddam. He's saying that al-Qaeda was operating in Iraq.

At no point does he mention a link between al-Qaeda and Saddam. Operating in Iraq =/= working with the Iraqi government.
Semantical horseshit. He knows, and you know though you pretend not to, that this will reinforce the al-Quieda - Saddam bullshit that the idiots have been eating up for years.

Semantical horseshit. He knows, and you know though you pretend not to, that this will reinforce the al-Quieda - Saddam bullshit that the idiots have been eating up for years.
Eh, sorry, I was just playing devil's advocate. I agree with the OP as much as you do.

I don't think it looks pathetic. I think it looks deluded.

But that's how I've felt about that guy for a long time...

I don't think it looks pathetic. I think it looks deluded.

But that's how I've felt about that guy for a long time...

The way Cheney keeps insisting this, it seems pretty sad to me. I see him on a street corner shouting to the passerby: "They were in Iraq! Really! They were! You have to believe me!"

Somebody's got to feed the base. Might as well be Cheney. On a side note, the NY Sun suggested in an editorial the other day that Cheney ought to run for President. Could we get so lucky?
G.O.D. F.O.R.B.I.D.

The way Cheney keeps insisting this, it seems pretty sad to me. I see him on a street corner shouting to the passerby: "They were in Iraq! Really! They were! You have to believe me!"

Hehe... Yup, he and Rummy could shout to random passers by. That's a sight I'd like to see :p

The current administration has a good rating on the "Grumpy old man"-meter ;)

He's like that Iraqi guy who was on TV going all "Their troops are not close to Baghdad!"

Only, that guy was forced to spout such hogwash. :\

http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/

This guy?:p

http://www.welovetheiraqiinformationminister.com/

This guy?:p

I'm sure he knew what he was saying was bullshit though. I bet Cheney actually believes the things that he says.

I'm sure he knew what he was saying was bullshit though. I bet Cheney actually believes the things that he says.

Oh, come on. There's reality, and then there's whatever Dick furtively hopes FoxNews can persuade his electorate (the wilfully naive, the gullible, and the resolutely thick) to think of as being real. There's not a chance he gets those confused.

Somebody's got to feed the base. Might as well be Cheney. On a side note, the NY Sun suggested in an editorial the other day that Cheney ought to run for President. Could we get so lucky?

I support that. His approval rating is still in the single digits, right?

Oh, come on. There's reality, and then there's whatever Dick furtively hopes FoxNews can persuade his electorate (the wilfully naive, the gullible, and the resolutely thick) to think of as being real. There's not a chance he gets those confused.

I have to wonder. When one is constantly spinning propaganda, one can end up believing their own lies.