APPALLING: Giuliani Suggests Blaming Troops for Explosives By: blogic Posted: Thursday, October 28, 2004 on The Tide Goes Out Message Board: Politics Yesterday, I mentioned that Bush inaccurately claimed that Kerry had blamed the troops for the missing explosives in Iraq. In fact, Kerry blamed George Bush, and Bush was the first person to suggest the idea of blaming the troops. Well, this morning, Rudy Giuliani took the logical next step and did just that: The president was cautious the president was prudent the president did what a commander in chief should do. No matter how you try to blame it on the president the actual responsibility for it really would be for the troops that were there. Did they search carefully enough? Didn't they search carefully enough? You can also watch the Windows Media video. The hypocricy here is amazing. If Kerry makes any criticism of the war, the Bush campaign says that Kerry's attacking the troops. But if war news comes out that makes Bush look bad, the Bush campaign blames the troops. Mr. President, please tell your supporters to stop blaming our troops for your mistakes.

Hey blogic. Why don't you take you blinders off and see your candidate for what he really is. Kerry started this shit storm with an unsubstantiated allegation.

First, taking a comment out of context is not very sporting. Taking a 2 second blurb out of a 90 second answer is just criminal. Get a better site and look at the whole answer.

Second, while Kerry may not have said it, a quote from Lockhart:

{quote]"Now we know that the commander of these troops made very clear that his unit's sole mission was to rush to Baghdad despite specific warnings about this facility

When your campaign mouthpiece says it, anyone can rightly or wrongly infer the candidate either told him to, or approved it.

Cant have it both ways. But nice smear try. Do you work for CBS?

It is appalling. But I'm thinking America won't stand for the troops being blamed. Glad you posted this!!

What's appalling is Kerry continuing, even today, to bash the President with this absurd fabrication. While all of Kerry's apologists, here and elsewhere, keep changing the subject to diversionary ancillary stuff like this blog.

BTW, blogic, you are a partisan blindly regurgitating whatever you misread, with no interest in the truth or falsity of the crap you publish here. Bush did not "inaccurately claim" that Kerry had blamed the troops. What he said was that claiming that this material disappeared from under the noses of our troops, without knowing what actually happened, was demeaning and denigrating to our troops. That is a fair statement. You have been challenged repeatedly @ JU to substantiate your claims with facts and nearly always you can't. You repeatedly pass off rumor and bogus sources as reliable. Just like Kerry, you jump at any scrap of misinformation that you think might make Bush look bad in hopes of finding one that will gain a little traction, no matter how undeserved.

I used to think Kerry was just a garden variety spineless, finger-to-the-political-wind liberal whose only principle was winning. He's now crossed over to simple political scumbag. Shame on him. May it come back and bite his whole ass off, which will be better than he deserves.

Cheers,
Daiwa

Reply #8 By: blogic - 10/29/2004 9:07:29 AM Maybe that's what Bush believes -- that he really doesn't see how he could be the one held responsible for this. So you're right, Bush doesn't say that Kerry blames the troops, what he implies is that if the explosives were looted after the invasion, the troops are the ones who should be held responsible, which means that Kerry demeans the troops to even bring up the issue. Of course, that logic falls apart if you think the soldiers were following their orders and serving their country well -- that it's Bush who's responsible for this.

As I stated in another post, this arguement doesn't hold water. No soldier in his right mind is going to let someone loot a munitions dump on their watch. Because none of them are stupid enough to believe that the stuff wouldn't be used on them! If they were there, they secured the site! And just a question. If you don't want to believe what I just wrote that's your opinion. But how is this Bush's fault? The orders for something like this would come from the commanders on the ground not Bush!

Reply #10 By: blogic - 10/29/2004 6:52:52 PM Readers, please notice that in spite of the fact that Kerry supporters and Kerry himself hold Bush responsible, Bush supporters keep trying to shift the blame to the troops. As Americans, we support our troops even as they protect our lives, and we see that their Commander-in-Chief has served both them and us poorly

And pray tell where did you find this? After an hours worth of searching on the web I could find nothing to backup your accusation.

hmmm, this really gets more interesting by the minute, doesn't it?

Reply #14 By: blogic - 11/1/2004 12:44:39 PM The International Herald Tribune is now reporting that a journalist saw the al-Qaqaa facility being looted. So much for the Pentagon's various contradictory stories.

Sorry but I won't trust *anything* coming out of a Frenchman/womans mouth.