This has nothing to do with whether individual citizens were pro or anti invasion.
This has nothing to do with whether invading was a good idea.
I realize it's about history, but it seems that whenever Republicans or Democrats are to blame for anything, they go back to the past to point out how the other side did wrong pertaining to that issue in the past.
Which is sometimes a valid point. However, ignoring that both sides are doing it when it's the case is as bad as wrongly assigning blame.
This, to me, is folly unless you're only talking about media representation, which you were to a point.
Only to a point.
And it is not folly, as you appear to miss the point. It's to prevent the rewriting of history, as I stated, as the Democrats continually try to paint Iraq as if both sides didn't get us there. I really don't understand why this causes such an issue for some people.
Iraq = bad. Got it! How we got there should be honestly approached and remembered.
P.S. Not "everyone" was on board, unless you're only talking about politicians and the East-Coast media.
*sigh*
WHY IS THIS HARD???????????????
Both sides of the political aisle agreed Iraq probably had NBC weapons and ties to terrorism.
When Bush wanted to invade Iraq the Democrats dug their heels in about invasion. Which is fine and not my beef!
Since the invasion Democrats have attempted to rewrite history, pretending they hadn't previously spoken about Iraqi ties to terrorism and about Iraqi NBC weapons programs. Liberals perpetuate this rewriting of history.
All I want is honesty about how we got there. For the third time, "When we pretend history didn't happen as it did it does everyone a disservice."
This has nothing to do with whether individual citizens were pro or anti invasion.
This has nothing to do with whether invading was a good idea.
This has nothing to do with whether invading was a good idea.
I realize it's about history, but it seems that whenever Republicans or Democrats are to blame for anything, they go back to the past to point out how the other side did wrong pertaining to that issue in the past.
Which is sometimes a valid point. However, ignoring that both sides are doing it when it's the case is as bad as wrongly assigning blame.
This, to me, is folly unless you're only talking about media representation, which you were to a point.
Only to a point.
And it is not folly, as you appear to miss the point. It's to prevent the rewriting of history, as I stated, as the Democrats continually try to paint Iraq as if both sides didn't get us there. I really don't understand why this causes such an issue for some people.
Iraq = bad. Got it! How we got there should be honestly approached and remembered.
P.S. Not "everyone" was on board, unless you're only talking about politicians and the East-Coast media.
*sigh*
WHY IS THIS HARD???????????????
Both sides of the political aisle agreed Iraq probably had NBC weapons and ties to terrorism.
When Bush wanted to invade Iraq the Democrats dug their heels in about invasion. Which is fine and not my beef!
Since the invasion Democrats have attempted to rewrite history, pretending they hadn't previously spoken about Iraqi ties to terrorism and about Iraqi NBC weapons programs. Liberals perpetuate this rewriting of history.
All I want is honesty about how we got there. For the third time, "When we pretend history didn't happen as it did it does everyone a disservice."
This has nothing to do with whether individual citizens were pro or anti invasion.
This has nothing to do with whether invading was a good idea.
I can't be more clear.
Reply
Leave a comment