Via Yahoo! comes the masterful journalism of Al-Reuters, who stop just short of accusing President Bush of endangering the country by toppling one of its enemies. The President will appear on 60 Minutes on CBS, which Al-Reuters has the temerity to label a "news program". To be fair, since 60 Minutes is a vehicle for advancing the liberal agenda in the guise of a muckraking news program, it may be a simple mistake on Al-Reuters' part.
President George W. Bush acknowledged on Saturday that some of his administration's decisions during the Iraq war had contributed to instability there but he still believed he was right to topple Saddam Hussein.
Insisting it was crucial to U.S. interests to get the sectarian violence in Iraq under control, Bush told CBS in an interview that the strife there was a destabilizing force in the Middle East that "could lead to attacks here in America."
Pressed on whether actions by his administration had created further instability in Iraq, Bush said, "Well, no question, decisions have made things unstable."
There was stability before 9/11, with Saddam in power, and yet there were attacks on America and her overseas embassies and military structure. Stability did not prevent terror from coming to our soil. Oddly enough, despite all of the danger the instability in Iraq has caused, there have been no successful attacks since Saddam was toppled.
But look for this theme to continue in the coming months. Should there be an attack on U.S. soil or interests, no matter the value of the target or the level of damage, expect triumphant finger-pointing from Al-Reuters, CBS, and the rest of the dominant liberal branch of the MSM.
But there is one more BDS-enhanced graph to highlight in the Al-Reuters article.
Bush launched the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 promising to rid the country of weapons of mass destruction, but none were found. He said in the CBS interview that had Saddam been allowed to remain in power, the Iraqi leader would have been competing with Iran to acquire a nuclear weapon.
Al-Reuters presses the "Iraq was Bush's ill-considered whim" myth, doing whatever they can to play both the NoWMD™ and BushLied™ cards. They hint that the spectre of Iran getting nuclear weapons should be discredited by not finding them in Iraq. For their sake, I hope they're right. But for the sake of our troops overseas, the American populace, and the future of Western Civilization, I'm glad the method of safeguarding our future is not Al-Reuters' call.
Sphere: Related Content