Bush Owes No Apology
Find a Conversation
| Wed, 04-14-2004 - 6:35pm |
But Hannity, who was on hand to promote his book "Deliver Us From Evil," would have none of it.
"Let's talk about critics and the question of whether he owns up to mistakes," Holt began. "Has he made mistakes in the war on terror?"
"Why should he apologize, number one, for the terrorist attack that was brought to this country?" Hannity shot back.
"We've got to face reality here - America is at war and they attacked us," the conservative host reminded, noting that critics of Bush's handling of the war on terror seem to want it both ways.
"We're criticizing the president for not responding to a memo five weeks . But yet we knew that Saddam wasn't abiding by 17 resolutions in 12 years' period of time. And he didn't abide by a cease-fire agreement."
Hannity told "Today" that had Bush allowed Saddam to remain in power and his continued efforts to obtain weapons of mass destruction resulted in an attack on the U.S., "would we not have a commission a year and a half later" blaming Bush for ignoring the threat.
Holt complained that Hannity's scenario was "theoretical."
Just like the August 2001 Presidential Daily Briefing that warned Osama bin Laden wanted to attack America.

Pages
>"Part of the problem with what happened over the last three years with Bush IMO is that there has been no national debate, no opposition to ANYTHING he has done since 9/11.
But US has a tendency to think that only when Americans are killed it is terrorism, but when US kills it is military. when others are at war, it is uprising, when they are at war it is defending. What a pot of crock!!
Not only that Iraqi's are deprived of food safety and oil which is produced in their own country. How ironic is that? Previously people were killed only if they went aginst Saddam, now there is not differentiation. People are getting killed .
I am sure they must think about us being the terrorist terrorising their streets.
How can Bush/Haliburton sleep at night????
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
You have informed opinion vs. uninformed. It was the informed who are privy to classified information that "rubber stamped" President Bush's decisions. It was the uninformed (not privy to classified information) Howard Dean who started questioning these actions and got so much traction from uninformed (not privy to classified information) left wingers. When Howard was successful with the left blindly bashing this administration's policies, the other Democrats flip-flopped (except Lieberman) and decided that this was a good way to get votes.
You have to admit this is true.
Where are the WMD? Where are the cheering crowds of Iraqis waiting anxiously to contribute selflessly to their new democracy? Where is our conviction that June 30 will be the dawn of a brave new era? And Bush now says the United States may experience at least an attempt of a terrorist attack, so are we really safer now, or was that a pipe dream?!
Gettingahandle
Ignorance is Nature's most abundant fuel for decision making.
Must you make such statements--exactly what purpose does this comment serve?
I believe we are safer now since many of the terrorist leaders are now dead or in prison. The president never said this was going to be easy, and it may get worse before it gets better, but it will get better. As you know, I much prefer this approach to sitting here waiting for the next attack. At least we are more vigilant now, and have stopped many before they have happened.
Pages