I found this on Mike the Mad Biologists blog.
Here’s a few choice citations:
17) On Meet the Press in July 2007, David Brooks declared that 10,000 Iraqis a month would perish if the United States pulled out. Bob Woodward, also on the show, challenged him on this, asking for his source. Brooks admitted, “I just picked that 10,000 out of the air.”
18) Also in July 2007, an old clip of a C-SPAN interview with Vice President Cheney from 1994 surfaced, in which he defended the decision not to depose Saddam Hussein during Gulf War I: “Once you got to Iraq and took it over…then what are you going to put in its place?…It’s a quagmire if you go that far and try to take over Iraq.” He explained, “And the question for the president…was how many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth? Our judgment was, not very many, and I think we got it right.”
You can find the whole list at The Iraq Follies article at Mother Jones Journal.
Here are my thoughts on the two items that I block quoted.
Mr. Brooks is a New York Times columnist. But here’s the thing, opinion doesn’t need to be substantiated by tangible evidence. But Mr. Brooks should be tossed from the NYT for pulling such a ludicrous number of 10,000 straight out of his poop chute.
Here, I’ll pull a number out of my ass too. I’d say that his number is the inverse, that while the U.S. occupies Iraq there are probably 10,000 or more deaths or Iraqi citizens, both directly and indirectly.
As for Mr. Cheney, here we have him on the record saying what folly it would be to invade Iraq and depose Saddam Hussein just eight years before he became Vice President of the United States. Cheney btw has long ties to the Reagan administration, along with ties to Halliburton, big oil, and all the things that we the little people don’t have any say over.
How Bush ever got elected in the first places comes into question here. But then the media was complicit in the cover-ups. Only those of us who have web access and read media in other countries got to see what was really behind these lying sacks of shit.
And don’t get me started on election irregularities, or the scorched earth tactics being employed by Hillary Clinton. Put it this way, who do we think is financing the Clinton campaign? It’s large corporate interests. Curiously the Obama campaign is the inverse, most of their donors are < $100 donors.
What Mrs. Clinton doesn’t realize is that by pursuing such a scorched earth policy, she dooms us to a continuation of the neocon agenda.