Bush and Officials Lied leading up to Iraq war

[maineman]

probably a direct result of the Iraq-Al Qida agreement.???

Ben Ladin himself met with a senior Iraqi intelligence officer in Khartoum in late 1994 or early 1995????

two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence.
---------
I guess this nonsense isn't considered sexing up the intelligence for the purpose of garnering public support for demonizing Saddam and Iraq..but you know damn well thats exactly what it is.....there was NO PROOF then make these accusations and there is none now.....but the Dims made this kind of noise for 10 years.....

again. I do not believe that anyone who understands the nature of wahabbism could ever seriously contemplate a situation where Saddam Hussein would provide training and material assistance to an organization that was created with the primary mission of destroying his regime.

I don't care what ANY politician said, I know that to be a fact. I KNOW that lots of politicians from both sides of the aisle made lots of noise about Saddam, but anyone who tried to suggest any sort of substantive collaboration regarding training or material assistance from Saddam to Al Qaeda is,in my opinion, ill-informed.

And as it turns out, one particular politician MADE that ill-informed case to the American people and took our nation to war on the wings of it, and that decision has cost us 4K DEAD, 27K wounded, nearly a trillion dollars and five years.... and I believe that the political party of THAT politician has earned a time out. I think that the republican party has earned America taking the keys away and making them sit in the corner for a decade or more.

 

[jreeves]

LOL

Yeah, judging from your personality on this board, I'm so sure you were ever so respectful to anti-war americans in 2003. lol. I'm sure you were like almost ll the rest of the Bush wingnuts. Ridiculing us, and dismissing our questions about the need to go to war. You really should be groveling and begging forgiveness. You sent thousands to the deaths, and cost us taxpayers hundreds of billions of dollars, on something that was a mistake.

I've noticed on here a lot of you liberals claim that Bush went to war because

#1 For Oil- Ignorant thinking....If we were going into seize control of Iraq's Oil we would be shipping that Oil back to the U.S. now. That's not the case.
#2 You think Bush had some axe to grind with Saddam because of an alleged assassination plot.....Again Bush could have accomplished this without invading Iraq, say precision bombing, assiassination.........
#3 You say it was because of 9/11 this sounds to me like the best justification....because Bush was trying to protect our country.

Lastly if it's so clear, like you all state that Bush misled us. Then why hasn't a democratically controlled Congress impeached Bush by now. Because of the simple fact there is no evidence Bush misled us to war. Call your own President an idiot if you want. But the facts show the majority of you all actually supported the war at it's onset....Here's a poll.....


By February 2002, 74% of Americans supported taking military action to remove Saddam Hussein from power.[

 

[maineman]

I've noticed on here a lot of you liberals claim that Bush went to war because

#1 For Oil- Ignorant thinking....If we were going into seize control of Iraq's Oil we would be shipping that Oil back to the U.S. now. That's not the case.
#2 You think Bush had some axe to grind with Saddam because of an alleged assassination plot.....Again Bush could have accomplished this without invading Iraq, say precision bombing, assiassination.........
#3 You say it was because of 9/11 this sounds to me like the best justification....because Bush was trying to protect our country.

Lastly if it's so clear, like you all state that Bush misled us. Then why hasn't a democratically controlled Congress impeached Bush by now. Because of the simple fact there is no evidence Bush misled us to war. Call your own President an idiot if you want. But the facts show the majority of you all actually supported the war at it's onset....Here's a poll.....


By February 2002, 74% of Americans supported taking military action to remove Saddam Hussein from power.[

again. a majority of democrats in congress voted against the war in Iraq. I remain proud of that fact.

 

[jreeves]

Remember all the French jokes that were circulating in those days because they would not go long with king george. Well, guess what? They were right! There were no WMDs and the war was a mistake.

This is relavant to the debate how....

 

[jreeves]

again. a majority of democrats in congress voted against the war in Iraq. I remain proud of that fact.

How is this relavant to most Americans??

 

[maineman]

How is this relavant to most Americans??

so, I take it that you have abandoned your position that a majority of democrats voted for it? good.

and it is relevant to the extent that most Americans think that Iraq has been a terrible mistake and making it clear to them which party got us into this mess is appropriately enlightening.

 

[JimH52]

How is this relavant to most Americans??

And explain again your relevance to intelligent life on earth.

 

[jreeves]

so, I take it that you have abandoned your position that a majority of democrats voted for it? good.

and it is relevant to the extent that most Americans think that Iraq has been a terrible mistake and making it clear to them which party got us into this mess is appropriately enlightening.

Bush had low approval numbers that last time he kicked your ass, so why should think this time it's going to be anything different? No, I haven't abandoned my position, It would seem if 74% of Americans supported the war then a majority of Democrats supported it as well right??

 

[jreeves]

Bush had low approval numbers that last time he kicked your ass, so why should think this time it's going to be anything different? No, I haven't abandoned my position, It would seem if 74% of Americans supported the war then a majority of Democrats supported it as well right??

Your now saying that Democrats aren't Americans, which sometimes with some of the fanatical raving I do question it.

 

[jreeves]

And explain again your relevance to intelligent life on earth.

See, this is typical liberalistic behavior, name calling...Na,Na,ah,boo,boo....your dumb...LOL

 

[maineman]

Bush had low approval numbers that last time he kicked your ass, so why should think this time it's going to be anything different? No, I haven't abandoned my position, It would seem if 74% of Americans supported the war then a majority of Democrats supported it as well right??

fact:
a majority of congressional democrats voted against it.

and your inability to grasp simple mathematical concepts is really beyond me trying to fix.

and you are kidding yourself if you think that McCain will bring out the vote against Obama in the fall.

 

[eots]

fact:
a majority of congressional democrats voted against it.

and your inability to grasp simple mathematical concepts is really beyond me trying to fix.

and you are kidding yourself if you think that McCain will bring out the vote against Obama in the fall.

NO KIDDING he is irrelavant..chosen to lose..disposable candidate..he is kerry...dole..

 

[jreeves]

fact:
a majority of congressional democrats voted against it.

and your inability to grasp simple mathematical concepts is really beyond me trying to fix.

and you are kidding yourself if you think that McCain will bring out the vote against Obama in the fall.

No your Liberalistic Times has united the Republican party.
Don't avoid that the majority of "American Democrats" supported the war. Proof is that 74% of Amercians supported the war.....So what your saying is that the Democrats in Congress didn't properly represent of the majority of it's constituients?LOL

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I've noticed that Gunny, and I am not going to fall for it. I refuse to believe what you say just because you keep repeating it.

Let's jus admit it. The facts don't matter anymore. It's all about what you want to believe and not what is real.

And, Gunny, why do you have to use the retard remark? It's called a fucking difference of opinion. There are just as many retards on the right as the left.

Retard is appropriate for an "opinion" that is couched as legal fact and presented as such by you and every other leftwing partisan hack on this board. And then we have you and others trying to claim consensus when there is absolutely none.

I have no problem with YOUR OPINION. But you and Maineman and DCD and the rest are not in fact claiming it is an opinion except when forced to when required to prove the "facts" you keep claiming.

This thread is not opinion when it comes to you Bush bashing pavlovic left wing partisans. You only trot out the word opinion when forced to by the simple FACT there is not ONE SHRED of evidence you opinion is in fact true.

 

[maineman]

No your Liberalistic Times has united the Republican party.
Don't avoid that the majority of "American Democrats" supported the war. Proof is that 74% of Amercians supported the war.....So what your saying is that the Democrats in Congress didn't properly represent of the majority of it's constituients?LOL

united the republican party? LOL

that is really rich! You guys are totally splintered now.

 

[mattskramer]

No your Liberalistic Times has united the Republican party.
Don't avoid that the majority of "American Democrats" supported the war. Proof is that 74% of Amercians supported the war.....So what your saying is that the Democrats in Congress didn't properly represent of the majority of it's constituients?LOL

How do you arrive at the conclusion that a majority of American Democrats supported the war? Do you have a link to a survey of American Democrats?

 

[maineman]

Retard is appropriate for an "opinion" that is couched as legal fact and presented as such by you and every other leftwing partisan hack on this board. And then we have you and others trying to claim consensus when there is absolutely none.

I have no problem with YOUR OPINION. But you and Maineman and DCD and the rest are not in fact claiming it is an opinion except when forced to when required to prove the "facts" you keep claiming.

This thread is not opinion when it comes to you Bush bashing pavlovic left wing partisans. You only trot out the word opinion when forced to by the simple FACT there is not ONE SHRED of evidence you opinion is in fact true.

hey..RGS...how ya coming on that math problem? or was it a civics lesson?

 

[maineman]

943, 944, 945

 

[maineman]

If I asked you, RGS, to tell me how many total republicans were serving in congress, how would you arrive at the answer? I suggest that you would count the number of republican representatives and the number of republican senators and add them together. Am I right?

 

[maineman]

what's your point? that some democrats fucked up? I know that. They are ALL on my shitlist until they publicly repent. It still does not change the fact that in CONGRESS, a MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS did NOT vote for the use of force.

to which you replied:

Yes a "majority" of democrats DID vote for it. unless your claiming there were only 40 democrats in the Senate?

now...who has a problem with understanding the difference between congress and senate? not me. that would be you.