
Be honest (for once): Bob Geiger at the Yellow Dog Blog posted 15 questions for Bush supporters last week that were quite thought provoking – I’ve found myself mulling them over ever since. (Not the least wondering if I should suggest to Bob that 15 questions might be too tasking for the average Bush voter, but that’s another issue.)
So, which is it, did they lie or were they merely criminally negligent?
Happily, I live safely behind the walls of the West Coast liberal bastion and do not count among my friends, family or work associates a single Bush supporter. However, I’ve come up with three questions on Iraq that I would pose to a Bush voter, if I knew one:
1. Yes or No: If the number one export of Iraq were olive oil, instead of petroleum oil, would we be there today?
2. One of the reasons Bush has given us for the occupation of Iraq is that we will create a foothold for democracy among the Arabs. Wouldn’t it have been less costly in blood and treasure simply to convince the Kuwaitis to hold elections? After all, we literally saved their asses from Saddam in 1992. Becoming a beacon for democracy in the Middle East would seem to be the very least they could do in return.
3. In the run-up to the war, did Bush and his team lie when they said Saddam had weapons of mass destruction?
No? Well, then the only other option is that they screwed up – and did so, as the vice president might say, big time.
In fact, this wildly inept miscalculation has led to over 100,000 casualities, including at least 2,200 dead U.S. service members and the fatalities of tens of thousands of innocent Iraqis. It has cost us upwards of $300 billion – and we’re not even halfway done yet. The Bush misadventure in Iraq will undoubtedly go down as the most monumentally inept war effort ever undertaken. (If they were Democrats the Bush team would be pursued by the media and the GOP for gross and homicidal official negligence.)
So, which is it, did they lie or were they merely criminally negligent?
Okay, Bushists, we await your answers.