Dick's 1994 view on Iraq

You first.

 

That wasn't the point of Stewart's argument.

You make legitimate reasons as to why Cheney might have changed his mind. That's fine. You can have a substantive debate on whether or not the Iraq war was necessary, or on the merits of a "strike them before they strike us" policy.

The problem that Stewart brought up -- and that a lot others woud agree with -- is that if you disagreed with Cheney and the White House then you were a " terrorist-sympathizing, America-hating defeatist who didn't have the stomach for the fight and that anything other than complete agreement with 100 percent of my views is aiding the enemy."

That's the bullshit part.

 

I'm not the one who's been throwing it around like a 3rd grader who just learned a curse word.

 

Now do you think it is more likely that he changed his mind or that he is a liar who used the war to promote the political and financial interests of his cronies?

 

I'm no journalist, but my understanding of quotation marks are that they represent a direct quote. In this case, I would assume one from the VP. can you cite it for me?

 

I think the latter is absurd & only believed by whacko conspiracy theorists.

 

You can Google it. Or Wikipedia, perhaps. Why don't you try educating yourself?

 

People can change their minds and their beliefs, over time. 13 years isn't that long. My change from a conservative (from my early teens to the age of 22) happened rather quickly, five or six years. So much of it has to do with how you formulated your beliefs then, versus how you formulate them now.

I'm not trying to excuse Cheney...but without knowing for sure what went into his "conversion," I have a harder time saying "you believed this then...how come not now?" In either case, though, his opinion, however it has evolved, has involved into a falsehood.

 

Are you serious?

You don't think that Cheney and other Republicans have questioned the patriotism of people who disagree with him on the war?

 

Guy, I find it rather interesting that you claim over and over and over that you don't know what a neocon is and you ask repeatedly for someone to explain it. Yet on another thread, I ask a rather straightforward question: why do you support the candidates you support, and it was like I was talking to a brick wall.

Despite what Boom was claiming, I wasn't laying in wait to pounce on your answer. I'd really like to know.

 

What he's saying is that Dick Cheney never said those specific words, in that order, rendering the entire point moot.

 

Why do you assume "falsehood" rather than "mistake" or "something I disagree with"?