Bush didn't just lie........

[rightwinger]

Fighting terrorism was nothing more than wagging the dog to Republicans

Yeah cause those democrats are not wagging the dog are they? Oh wait.. Isn't OBAMA the POTUS?

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now? Which of Obama's buddies are benefiting from these wars? Who was Hillary giving access to military secrets again? Who's been sending checks to the clintons?

Obama loudly opposed the war.....where were you?

Obama has had to deal with the Islamic upheaval caused by Bush. He had avoided using boots on the ground and nation building to solve his problems

Now, Clinton staged attacks on bin Laden were labeled by Republicans as a diversion to take attention away from more important topics like blow job impeachment

Show where Obama has done anything like that

Obama avoided boots on the ground? Really? Is your memory that faulty that you don't remember the Afghanistan surge that Obama said himself was a failure? That HE was a failure in Afghanistan? Far more troops killed under Obama in Afghanistan then ever was under Bush.

Afghanistan?

You mean the war Bush forgot about when he invaded Iraq? The war where Bush officially abandoned the war on terror?

 

[rightwinger]

Fighting terrorism was nothing more than wagging the dog to Republicans

Yeah cause those democrats are not wagging the dog are they? Oh wait.. Isn't OBAMA the POTUS?

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now?

From October 26th, 2002. - Barack Obama

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

ROFL so barry was against the war and against Saddam we'd be better off without him but should only go in with "strong international support" ... which we did. So he was good with it, this before he had a vote... this before he was a senator. But then when he was a Senator he voted for it. Go figure.

Strong International support?

You are not talking about the laughable "Coalition of the Willing" are you?

 

[RKMBrown]

In August 1998, President Clinton ordered missile strikes against targets in Afghanistan in an effort to hit Osama bin Laden, who had been linked to the embassy bombings in Africa (and was later connected to the attack on the USS Cole). The missiles reportedly missed bin Laden by a few hours, and Clinton was widely criticized by many who claimed he had ordered the strikes primarily to draw attention away from the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Fighting terrorism was nothing more than wagging the dog to Republicans

Yeah cause those democrats are not wagging the dog are they? Oh wait.. Isn't OBAMA the POTUS?

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now? Which of Obama's buddies are benefiting from these wars? Who was Hillary giving access to military secrets again? Who's been sending checks to the clintons?

Obama loudly opposed the war.....where were you?

Obama has had to deal with the Islamic upheaval caused by Bush. He had avoided using boots on the ground and nation building to solve his problems

Now, Clinton staged attacks on bin Laden were labeled by Republicans as a diversion to take attention away from more important topics like blow job impeachment

Show where Obama has done anything like that

He opposed it before he had a vote. Not really he gave a "unless" we get strong help clause. Meh.. then when he became a senator he vote for it multiple times. Obama owns this now. He's been POTUS for 7years. Bush is long gone.

 

[RKMBrown]

Yeah cause those democrats are not wagging the dog are they? Oh wait.. Isn't OBAMA the POTUS?

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now?

From October 26th, 2002. - Barack Obama

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

ROFL so barry was against the war and against Saddam we'd be better off without him but should only go in with "strong international support" ... which we did. So he was good with it, this before he had a vote... this before he was a senator. But then when he was a Senator he voted for it. Go figure.

Strong International support?

You are not talking about the laughable "Coalition of the Willing" are you?

Ok you define "strong"... it's a subjective term. Sort of like Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize for his strong support of peace... ROFL yeah for doing nothing at all.

 

[rightwinger]

Fighting terrorism was nothing more than wagging the dog to Republicans

Yeah cause those democrats are not wagging the dog are they? Oh wait.. Isn't OBAMA the POTUS?

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now? Which of Obama's buddies are benefiting from these wars? Who was Hillary giving access to military secrets again? Who's been sending checks to the clintons?

Obama loudly opposed the war.....where were you?

Obama has had to deal with the Islamic upheaval caused by Bush. He had avoided using boots on the ground and nation building to solve his problems

Now, Clinton staged attacks on bin Laden were labeled by Republicans as a diversion to take attention away from more important topics like blow job impeachment

Show where Obama has done anything like that

He opposed it before he had a vote. Not really he gave a "unless" we get strong help clause. Meh.. then when he became a senator he vote for it multiple times. Obama owns this now. He's been POTUS for 7years. Bush is long gone.

Hat part of "dumb war" don't you understand?

 

[rightwinger]

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now?

From October 26th, 2002. - Barack Obama

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

ROFL so barry was against the war and against Saddam we'd be better off without him but should only go in with "strong international support" ... which we did. So he was good with it, this before he had a vote... this before he was a senator. But then when he was a Senator he voted for it. Go figure.

Strong International support?

You are not talking about the laughable "Coalition of the Willing" are you?

Ok you define "strong"... it's a subjective term. Sort of like Obama getting the Nobel Peace Prize for his strong support of peace... ROFL yeah for doing nothing at all.

Bush suckered Tony Blair into his war
Where was Germany, France, Italy, Canada?
You know....our usual NATO coalition

 

[RKMBrown]

Yeah cause those democrats are not wagging the dog are they? Oh wait.. Isn't OBAMA the POTUS?

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now? Which of Obama's buddies are benefiting from these wars? Who was Hillary giving access to military secrets again? Who's been sending checks to the clintons?

Obama loudly opposed the war.....where were you?

Obama has had to deal with the Islamic upheaval caused by Bush. He had avoided using boots on the ground and nation building to solve his problems

Now, Clinton staged attacks on bin Laden were labeled by Republicans as a diversion to take attention away from more important topics like blow job impeachment

Show where Obama has done anything like that

He opposed it before he had a vote. Not really he gave a "unless" we get strong help clause. Meh.. then when he became a senator he vote for it multiple times. Obama owns this now. He's been POTUS for 7years. Bush is long gone.

Hat part of "dumb war" don't you understand?

Which one? Bush's dumb wars or Obama's? Who started more of these dumb wars in the ME, Bush or Obama?

 

[Faun]

In August 1998, President Clinton ordered missile strikes against targets in Afghanistan in an effort to hit Osama bin Laden, who had been linked to the embassy bombings in Africa (and was later connected to the attack on the USS Cole). The missiles reportedly missed bin Laden by a few hours, and Clinton was widely criticized by many who claimed he had ordered the strikes primarily to draw attention away from the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Fighting terrorism was nothing more than wagging the dog to Republicans

Here's a perfect example ... before 9.11, Clinton warned there could be a terrorist attack inside the U.S.. How did the nutty right respond to that warning...?

Clinton predicted on January 22 that it is "highly likely" that a terrorist group will attack on American soil within the next few years. He is using this risk as the excuse to create a Domestic Terrorism Team headed by a military "commander in chief," with a $2.8 billion budget. We should not underestimate the deceit and deviousness of Clinton's plans to use aggressive presidential actions to wipe out public memory of his impeachment trial.

Clinton s Post-Impeachment Push for Power -- March 1999 Phyllis Schlafly Report​

The rabid right doesn't give a shit about national security. All they care about is fighting Liberals and Democrats, even at the expense of national security.

 

[rightwinger]

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now? Which of Obama's buddies are benefiting from these wars? Who was Hillary giving access to military secrets again? Who's been sending checks to the clintons?

Obama loudly opposed the war.....where were you?

Obama has had to deal with the Islamic upheaval caused by Bush. He had avoided using boots on the ground and nation building to solve his problems

Now, Clinton staged attacks on bin Laden were labeled by Republicans as a diversion to take attention away from more important topics like blow job impeachment

Show where Obama has done anything like that

He opposed it before he had a vote. Not really he gave a "unless" we get strong help clause. Meh.. then when he became a senator he vote for it multiple times. Obama owns this now. He's been POTUS for 7years. Bush is long gone.

Hat part of "dumb war" don't you understand?

Which one? Bush's dumb wars or Obama's? Who started more of these dumb wars in the ME, Bush or Obama?

OK...lets go there

Wars Bush started.......7000 dead
Wars Obama started.....25 dead

 

[Faun]

Fighting terrorism was nothing more than wagging the dog to Republicans

Yeah cause those democrats are not wagging the dog are they? Oh wait.. Isn't OBAMA the POTUS?

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now? Which of Obama's buddies are benefiting from these wars? Who was Hillary giving access to military secrets again? Who's been sending checks to the clintons?

Obama loudly opposed the war.....where were you?

Obama has had to deal with the Islamic upheaval caused by Bush. He had avoided using boots on the ground and nation building to solve his problems

Now, Clinton staged attacks on bin Laden were labeled by Republicans as a diversion to take attention away from more important topics like blow job impeachment

Show where Obama has done anything like that

He opposed it before he had a vote. Not really he gave a "unless" we get strong help clause. Meh.. then when he became a senator he vote for it multiple times. Obama owns this now. He's been POTUS for 7years. Bush is long gone.

There was no vote "for the war." WTF are you talking about? You talking about voting for funding the troops? There was no alternative. It was either fund them or abandon them. That's voting for the troops; that's not voting for the war.

 

[Tuatara]

No administration in the recorded history of time used intelligence to sell their position. Not Clinton when he bombed Serbia for 72 days. Not Obama when he bombed Libya and help create ISIS.

I see we are being facetious here.

Dems, especially Mrs. Clinton who had an inside tract to the intelligence, were just stupid dupes, as they are today. Fooled by the evil genius of GWB. No wait that doesn't work because Bush is stupid, they were fooled by the mega genius of Powell and Chaney.

Really don't know what you are trying to say here. Please be clear.

Never the less the dems had the same intelligence of Bush but they choose just to listen to Bush, what freakin' idiots. Is that the point of your BS?

Wrong, they did not have the same intel as Bush. This has been pointed out quite thoroughly here.

Bush didn't need to convince the public all he had to do is convince the idiot Democrats.

By lying to them. I will agree that the democrats who voted to go to war are idiots.

It is not like Saddam actually had used WMD. (Kurds)

No one ever denied that. The assertion that he still had these WMDs 15 years later was the real issue.

It is not like Saddam attacked his neighbors. (Kuwait, Iran)

Yes, and the US supported the invasion Of Iran and the Kuwauit invasion was already dealt with. Remember the Gulf War.

It is not like the rest of the Arab world was ecstatic to get rid of the Butcher of Baghdad. (for the idiot dems, Saddam didn't sell meat thus getting that nick name)

There are other ways toget rid of people and most of the Arab world was opposed to the invasion.

It is not like his sons didn't have rape rooms.

I don't remember this as a reason to go to war.

It is not like Saddam had not created an environmental disaster when he was kicked out of Kuwait.

So are you suggesting we should kill/invade all those who create enviromental diasters.

It is not like Saddam wasn't attacking the US in the no fly zone.

Saddam saw the NFZs as illegal. Even the UN did not support it. Not one human life was killed by Saddam shooting at the aircraft.

None of that actually happened it was just GWB lying. Right. Gottaja.

None of this were the reasons Bush gave to go to war with Iraq. How about you stop all these strawman arguments and actually debate what Bush and his administration actually said.

 

[RKMBrown]

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now? Which of Obama's buddies are benefiting from these wars? Who was Hillary giving access to military secrets again? Who's been sending checks to the clintons?

Obama loudly opposed the war.....where were you?

Obama has had to deal with the Islamic upheaval caused by Bush. He had avoided using boots on the ground and nation building to solve his problems

Now, Clinton staged attacks on bin Laden were labeled by Republicans as a diversion to take attention away from more important topics like blow job impeachment

Show where Obama has done anything like that

He opposed it before he had a vote. Not really he gave a "unless" we get strong help clause. Meh.. then when he became a senator he vote for it multiple times. Obama owns this now. He's been POTUS for 7years. Bush is long gone.

Hat part of "dumb war" don't you understand?

Which one? Bush's dumb wars or Obama's? Who started more of these dumb wars in the ME, Bush or Obama?

OK...lets go there

Wars Bush started.......7000 dead
Wars Obama started.....25 dead

I call bull shit on your numbers.

 

[RKMBrown]

Yeah cause those democrats are not wagging the dog are they? Oh wait.. Isn't OBAMA the POTUS?

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now? Which of Obama's buddies are benefiting from these wars? Who was Hillary giving access to military secrets again? Who's been sending checks to the clintons?

Obama loudly opposed the war.....where were you?

Obama has had to deal with the Islamic upheaval caused by Bush. He had avoided using boots on the ground and nation building to solve his problems

Now, Clinton staged attacks on bin Laden were labeled by Republicans as a diversion to take attention away from more important topics like blow job impeachment

Show where Obama has done anything like that

He opposed it before he had a vote. Not really he gave a "unless" we get strong help clause. Meh.. then when he became a senator he vote for it multiple times. Obama owns this now. He's been POTUS for 7years. Bush is long gone.

There was no vote "for the war." WTF are you talking about? You talking about voting for funding the troops? There was no alternative. It was either fund them or abandon them. That's voting for the troops; that's not voting for the war.

Funny there I was thinking congress held the power of the purse and the ability to throw the bum out of the WH if they wanted to, for example for illegally starting a war. But hey it's just Congress I guess your right the POTUS can do anything he wants declare war whatever, .. no congressional approval necessary.. heh... who knew?

 

[RKMBrown]

No administration in the recorded history of time used intelligence to sell their position. Not Clinton when he bombed Serbia for 72 days. Not Obama when he bombed Libya and help create ISIS.

I see we are being facetious here.

Dems, especially Mrs. Clinton who had an inside tract to the intelligence, were just stupid dupes, as they are today. Fooled by the evil genius of GWB. No wait that doesn't work because Bush is stupid, they were fooled by the mega genius of Powell and Chaney.

Really don't know what you are trying to say here. Please be clear.

Never the less the dems had the same intelligence of Bush but they choose just to listen to Bush, what freakin' idiots. Is that the point of your BS?

Wrong, they did not have the same intel as Bush. This has been pointed out quite thoroughly here.

Bush didn't need to convince the public all he had to do is convince the idiot Democrats.

By lying to them. I will agree that the democrats who voted to go to war are idiots.

It is not like Saddam actually had used WMD. (Kurds)

No one ever denied that. The assertion that he still had these WMDs 15 years later was the real issue.

It is not like Saddam attacked his neighbors. (Kuwait, Iran)

Yes, and the US supported the invasion Of Iran and the Kuwauit invasion was already dealt with. Remember the Gulf War.

It is not like the rest of the Arab world was ecstatic to get rid of the Butcher of Baghdad. (for the idiot dems, Saddam didn't sell meat thus getting that nick name)

There are other ways toget rid of people and most of the Arab world was opposed to the invasion.

It is not like his sons didn't have rape rooms.

I don't remember this as a reason to go to war.

It is not like Saddam had not created an environmental disaster when he was kicked out of Kuwait.

So are you suggesting we should kill/invade all those who create enviromental diasters.

It is not like Saddam wasn't attacking the US in the no fly zone.

Saddam saw the NFZs as illegal. Even the UN did not support it. Not one human life was killed by Saddam shooting at the aircraft.

None of that actually happened it was just GWB lying. Right. Gottaja.

None of this were the reasons Bush gave to go to war with Iraq. How about you stop all these strawman arguments and actually debate what Bush and his administration actually said.

Yet we did it anyway. Why did the democrats vote for it? Why did they not prosecute Bush for war crimes? Why did they let him get away with it?

 

[Tuatara]

No administration in the recorded history of time used intelligence to sell their position. Not Clinton when he bombed Serbia for 72 days. Not Obama when he bombed Libya and help create ISIS.

I see we are being facetious here.

Dems, especially Mrs. Clinton who had an inside tract to the intelligence, were just stupid dupes, as they are today. Fooled by the evil genius of GWB. No wait that doesn't work because Bush is stupid, they were fooled by the mega genius of Powell and Chaney.

Really don't know what you are trying to say here. Please be clear.

Never the less the dems had the same intelligence of Bush but they choose just to listen to Bush, what freakin' idiots. Is that the point of your BS?

Wrong, they did not have the same intel as Bush. This has been pointed out quite thoroughly here.

Bush didn't need to convince the public all he had to do is convince the idiot Democrats.

By lying to them. I will agree that the democrats who voted to go to war are idiots.

It is not like Saddam actually had used WMD. (Kurds)

No one ever denied that. The assertion that he still had these WMDs 15 years later was the real issue.

It is not like Saddam attacked his neighbors. (Kuwait, Iran)

Yes, and the US supported the invasion Of Iran and the Kuwauit invasion was already dealt with. Remember the Gulf War.

It is not like the rest of the Arab world was ecstatic to get rid of the Butcher of Baghdad. (for the idiot dems, Saddam didn't sell meat thus getting that nick name)

There are other ways toget rid of people and most of the Arab world was opposed to the invasion.

It is not like his sons didn't have rape rooms.

I don't remember this as a reason to go to war.

It is not like Saddam had not created an environmental disaster when he was kicked out of Kuwait.

So are you suggesting we should kill/invade all those who create enviromental diasters.

It is not like Saddam wasn't attacking the US in the no fly zone.

Saddam saw the NFZs as illegal. Even the UN did not support it. Not one human life was killed by Saddam shooting at the aircraft.

None of that actually happened it was just GWB lying. Right. Gottaja.

None of this were the reasons Bush gave to go to war with Iraq. How about you stop all these strawman arguments and actually debate what Bush and his administration actually said.

Yet we did it anyway. Why did the democrats vote for it? Why did they not prosecute Bush for war crimes? Why did they let him get away with it?

That is one question I would like answered.

I rememer Obama saying something about not wasting any time going after Bush in his role on the invasion of Iraq. Anyone here shed any light with the actual quote or reasons behind it?

I do have this.

The measure in question was H. Res. 1258, introduced by then-Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, on June 10, 2008. The resolution -- a 167-page laundry list of criticisms -- accused Bush of "high crimes and misdemeanors," citing numerous "abuses of power" related to his prosecution of the war in Iraq and the fight against global terrorism, among other topics.

If Jackson Lee means to define "we" as the Democratic caucus as a whole, she has a point. The resolution never gained wide support among the Democrats, even though they controlled Congress at the time. The bill died quietly in committee.

Pelosi explained her thinking about the impeachment resolution in a July 2008 interview on ABC's The View. "I thought that impeachment would be divisive for the country," she said. "We have to create jobs, expand healthcare, protect the American people and educate our children. And you can’t do that if you’re trying to impeach the President at the same time, unless you have the goods that this president committed crimes."

 

[rightwinger]

Obama loudly opposed the war.....where were you?

Obama has had to deal with the Islamic upheaval caused by Bush. He had avoided using boots on the ground and nation building to solve his problems

Now, Clinton staged attacks on bin Laden were labeled by Republicans as a diversion to take attention away from more important topics like blow job impeachment

Show where Obama has done anything like that

He opposed it before he had a vote. Not really he gave a "unless" we get strong help clause. Meh.. then when he became a senator he vote for it multiple times. Obama owns this now. He's been POTUS for 7years. Bush is long gone.

Hat part of "dumb war" don't you understand?

Which one? Bush's dumb wars or Obama's? Who started more of these dumb wars in the ME, Bush or Obama?

OK...lets go there

Wars Bush started.......7000 dead
Wars Obama started.....25 dead

I call bull shit on your numbers.

I may have exaturated a little

The numbers for Obama are a little high

 

[Tuatara]

Fighting terrorism was nothing more than wagging the dog to Republicans

Yeah cause those democrats are not wagging the dog are they? Oh wait.. Isn't OBAMA the POTUS?

Example?

Obama was for the war to get votes before he was against the war to get votes before he was for the "real" war in afgainstan after he got elected before he was against the war bush started in the middle east, before he was for the war in 12 other countries, before... wait... I forget are the democrats for or again war now?

From October 26th, 2002. - Barack Obama

Now let me be clear – I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity.

He’s a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him.

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars.

ROFL so barry was against the war and against Saddam we'd be better off without him but should only go in with "strong international support" ... which we did. So he was good with it, this before he had a vote... this before he was a senator. But then when he was a Senator he voted for it. Go figure.

I'm confused here. You are talking about Obama but you put up a Hilary video.

 

[Contumacious]

In August 1998, President Clinton ordered missile strikes against targets in Afghanistan in an effort to hit Osama bin Laden, who had been linked to the embassy bombings in Africa (and was later connected to the attack on the USS Cole). The missiles reportedly missed bin Laden by a few hours, and Clinton was widely criticized by many who claimed he had ordered the strikes primarily to draw attention away from the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Fighting terrorism was nothing more than wagging the dog to Republicans

Here's a perfect example ... before 9.11, Clinton warned there could be a terrorist attack inside the U.S.. How did the nutty right respond to that warning...?

Clinton predicted on January 22 that it is "highly likely" that a terrorist group will attack on American soil within the next few years. He is using this risk as the excuse to create a Domestic Terrorism Team headed by a military "commander in chief," with a $2.8 billion budget. We should not underestimate the deceit and deviousness of Clinton's plans to use aggressive presidential actions to wipe out public memory of his impeachment trial.

Clinton s Post-Impeachment Push for Power -- March 1999 Phyllis Schlafly Report​

The rabid right doesn't give a shit about national security. All they care about is fighting Liberals and Democrats, even at the expense of national security.

One does not have to be a rocket scientist to be able to predict that US warmongering and military interventionism in foreign countries would provoke a domestic RETALIATORY attack.


.

 

[Faun]

In August 1998, President Clinton ordered missile strikes against targets in Afghanistan in an effort to hit Osama bin Laden, who had been linked to the embassy bombings in Africa (and was later connected to the attack on the USS Cole). The missiles reportedly missed bin Laden by a few hours, and Clinton was widely criticized by many who claimed he had ordered the strikes primarily to draw attention away from the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

Fighting terrorism was nothing more than wagging the dog to Republicans

Here's a perfect example ... before 9.11, Clinton warned there could be a terrorist attack inside the U.S.. How did the nutty right respond to that warning...?

Clinton predicted on January 22 that it is "highly likely" that a terrorist group will attack on American soil within the next few years. He is using this risk as the excuse to create a Domestic Terrorism Team headed by a military "commander in chief," with a $2.8 billion budget. We should not underestimate the deceit and deviousness of Clinton's plans to use aggressive presidential actions to wipe out public memory of his impeachment trial.

Clinton s Post-Impeachment Push for Power -- March 1999 Phyllis Schlafly Report​

The rabid right doesn't give a shit about national security. All they care about is fighting Liberals and Democrats, even at the expense of national security.

One does not have to be a rocket scientist to be able to predict that US warmongering and military interventionism in foreign countries would provoke a domestic RETALIATORY attack.


.

The salient part wasn`t Clinton's perseptive warning -- it was the treasonist rights' reaction. CAPICHE?

 

[MarcATL]

We're seeing much of the same manipulation today. There are actually people who believe we should mount a ground war against ISIS and as I noted in a different thread, George Pataki just said, on CNN, that he would put "boots on the ground" to fight ISIS. When he was asked "where?", he couldn't answser.

The radical rightwing bastards are already campaigning to take us down the exact. same. road.