Why is George W. Bush Allowed to Lie?

11/09/2010 on Oprah:

"I'll tell you what was wrong. Saddam Hussein deceived everybody. He didn't want people to know he did not have them ... which is strange because I made it clear to him to let the (arms) inspectors in or we'll remove you from power and he didn't believe me, sadly,"

Iraq insisted it did not have WMD's and they did let inspectors in. Bush told them to leave and invaded anyway.

Update:

You people are absolutely delusional. The inspectors were in country at the time of the invasion. Bush told them to leave and attacked anyway. Saying he "wouldn't let the inspectors in" is a LIE.

Update 2:

"Bush is attempting to imply that this suspicious behavior was done on purpose to cause western intelligence to conclude that he HAD WMDs when he did not."

No, he's not attempting to imply that. He is attempting to rewrite history and create the impression that Iraq didn't let the inspectors in, which is FALSE.

17 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Great question, have a star.

    Let's not forget that both Condi Rice & Colin Powell both stated live on tv during 2001 that Saddam DID NOT have WMD's and that the USA was able to prevent him from developing them.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHnSPsZshyM

    Youtube thumbnail

    Then The Idiot himself admits that Saddam didn't have them.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=soohikNdbWs

    Youtube thumbnail

    &feature=related

    For the benefit of the various know-nothings above who claim the UNSCOM inspectors were blocked or thrown out of Iraq, allow me to educate your Fox news addicted miniscule minds. Prior to the 1998 air strikes ordered by Clinton, director of UNSCOM operations Richard Butler was told to remove his staff. In his book Saddam Defiant, on page 224 he says, "I received a phone call from US ambassador Peter Burleigh, inviting me for a private conversation at the US mission. Burleigh informed me that on instructions from Washington it would be 'prudent to take measures to secure the safety & security of UNSCOM staff presently in Iraq'. I told him that I would act on this advise and remove my staff from Iraq".

    When the UNSCOM inspectors boss say they were pulled in his book, then they were pulled.

    Also, then UN Secretary General Kofi Annan stated that, "I did get a phone call from Ambassador Burleigh, advising that they are asking US personnel in the region to leave. And that they had advised chief inspector Richard Butler to withdraw UNSCOM, and Butler and I later spoke".

    Facts 1, Fox news 0

  • 1 decade ago

    It's not a lie, you just didn't understand his point. Iraq was cited by the inspectors as acting suspiciously at the time. The inspectors frequently were made to wait outside sites they wanted to inspect, documents they asked for to show what happened to the WMDs we know they had at one point were not made available to inspectors, and so forth.

    These behaviors were even cited by the inspector who was known to be heavily biased in favor of clearing IRaq and forced him to concede that Iraq was NOT fully compliant. It was suspicious behavior, and one wonder why they would act that way if they had nothing to hide.

    Bush is attempting to imply that this suspicious behavior was done on purpose to cause western intelligence to conclude that he HAD WMDs when he did not. It's not a very logical claim on Bush's part because it would have been an irrational act by Hussein as it precipitated invasion by the only army Hussein knew he couldn't stand against. But the fact that his claim is illogical does not mean that it is a lie.

  • 1 decade ago

    Saddam DID play as though he had the WMD's, why do you think he made such a big deal about when and where the inspectors were allowed to inspect? He did not allow unfettered access to suspected WMD sites and that is why he sucessfully acted as though he had them. (many experts still aren't convinced he didn't)

  • 1 decade ago

    Paul, why are YOU allowed to lie? There were 17 UN resolutions condemning Iraq for not allowing the inspectors in to the places that they needed to go to, Iraq let them in country but refused to allow them in suspected WMD warehouses and production facilities. Furthermore, Iraq said that it had WMD's then claimed that they didn't, the CEASE FIRE agreement mandated that he turn over all WMD's, proof that he destroyed those weapons and/or access must be granted to international inspectors to insure his compliance.

    You can like Bush or not, but the fact remains that LEGALLY a cease fire agreement is not a peace treaty ending the war, it is a temporary cessation of hostilities that either side can resume at will and in this instance Hussein was not living up to the cease fire agreements which allowed him to stay in power following the total destruction of his forces following his invasion of Kuwait.

    Facts are your friends, please learn them.

    whale

  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • ?
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    Where do the nut jobs come from that believe Bush pulled the inspectors so he could invade Iraq? Just wondering, since I remember the inspectors being denied entry or once allowed in the country, denied access to facilities. So, the lie lays with those thinking his comments are a lie.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Fail

    Congressional Record 1998 - Democrats on Saddam Huessin's WMD program leading up to President Clinton signing into law, the Iraq Liberation Act outlining the need for America to force a "regime change" in Iraq.

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/949198/po...

    Source(s): Watch and listen to the Democrats claim Iraq has WMD and that Saddam aided terrorists including Al Qaeda. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i87cZ3Og6ts
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Saddam did not let inspectors into 'presidential' compounds the size of an army base, why are you lying?

  • peachy
    Lv 6
    1 decade ago

    Yeah right...I'm gonna believe what a crazy, murderous, greedy ruler tells me instead of what Bush tells me. Sounds as though you WANT a reason to diss Bush. Teensy-minded liberals will cling to any reasoning, even an insane one like this "question" to blame Bush for the WMD incident. I believe there were WMD's, as our intelligence informed us, but they were removed at some point.

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Strange ,, I recall a bunch of back and forth and Saddam saying the inspectors could come in , but then not letting them .

  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Lying is the intentional telling of a falsehood. Bush, as well as Pelosi, Reid and many Dems came out and said that there were WMD's. It was based on false intelligence. The statements did not even rise to the level of negligence, much less lying.

    But you knew that already.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.