Watch: The 1994 Video Dick Cheney Doesn’t Want You to See

[KamaAina]

http://www.occupydemocrats.com/watch-the-1994-video-dick-cheney-doesnt-want-you-to-see/

If this video doesn’t convince you that Dick Cheney lied America into the war in Iraq solely for his own profit and that of his oil and military contractor buddies, then you are probably a Tea Partier.

During the 1994 interview with the American Enterprise Institute, the former vice president to President Bush actually made perfect sense when explaining why America should not invade Iraq, rightfully asserting that it would lead to a “quagmire”.

Of course, after gaining control of the Oval Office in 2000 and using the September 11 attacks and imaginary weapons of mass destruction as an excuse, he misled the American people and Congress into war in Iraq, costing thousands of American lives, hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians’ lives, and more than three trillion dollars that could have been better spent right here in America educating our children and rebuilding our crumbling infrastructure.

Please watch the video below:

[Cirque du So-What]

1. That was before he became CEO of Halliburton.

Once he saw how profitable the invasion and occupation of Iraq would be, he did a 180.

[immoderate]

2. Cheney in a lucid moment.

--imm

[IcyPeas]

3. George H.W. Bush said exactly the same thing in his book

He called it exactly that: a quagmire.

GEORGE H.W. BUSH AND IRAQI QUAGMIRES



I received this little tidbit this morning from the list serve of Historians Against the War:
In his 1998 book, A World Transformed, George H.W. Bush describes his reason for not going after Saddam at the end of the first Gulf war:"Extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq . . . would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. . . . We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad . . . [and] rule Iraq. . . . Under those circumstances there would have been no viable exit strategy . . . the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land."
- See more at: http://historynewsnetwork.org/blog/2929#sthash.k8g3xQJB.dpuf