So Tenet says they never said "imminent" threat. Bush says he never... [View All]

[Brotherjohn]

... said "imminent" threat.

That still, then, begs the question: If the threat was not imminent, then why did we HAVE to invade, and RIGHT AWAY? Why did we have to give Hussein a 48-hr deadline? Why did we cut off the U.N. inspections process? (EVEN IF you didn't think it was working, although what we now know shows it was working) Why, Bush, why? Explain that to the 500-plus dead soldiers.

This is all assuming that Bush didn't believe the threat was imminent, as he seems to be stating now when he says he never said the exact word "imminent" (although we know members of the WH did use that word). Of course, Bush may not have said "imminent", but we all know he and his staff used so many synonyms and phrases which meant that the threat was imminent ("immediate", "mortal", "mushroom cloud"...), that he DID in fact "say" the threat was imminent.

So in essence, in stating now that it was not imminent, he is admitting that he overstated the case for war when he repeatedly said, in other ways, that it was. Which begs the question: Why did you exaggerrate the case for war, Mr. Bush?

Both questions sink him. There are no adequate answers other than what everyone already knows, but he can't admit:
- He did say, in many ways, that the threat was imminent, and said that this threat was the reason we had to invade.
- He knew (and admits now) that the threat was not.
- He therefore took us to war for false reasons.

He should be impeached, but we'll have to settle for the electorate, since congress isn't up to the job.