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

[NYcarbineer]

They didn't. They voted against it.

Rewriting history again. The leadership, majority of senate and big minority in the house voted for it. You hold them accountable zero for that. In fact, you've voted for one of them for President, one for Vice President and you plan to vote next year for another for President

The Democrats in the House voted against it. That is an inarguable fact.

No, "the democrats" in the House didn't, some of them didn't

You said the Democrats got us into the war. No, they didn't. The Democrats in the House voted down the resolution,

which means it was dead as far as the Democrats were concerned.

Truism, you said the Democrats are not responsible, you put no limit on that statement

The 147 Democrats who voted against it are not responsible for the disaster.

Nor are the 7 Republicans.

lol

 

[Redfish]

Rewriting history again. The leadership, majority of senate and big minority in the house voted for it. You hold them accountable zero for that. In fact, you've voted for one of them for President, one for Vice President and you plan to vote next year for another for President

The Democrats in the House voted against it. That is an inarguable fact.

No, "the democrats" in the House didn't, some of them didn't

You said the Democrats got us into the war. No, they didn't. The Democrats in the House voted down the resolution,

which means it was dead as far as the Democrats were concerned.

Truism, you said the Democrats are not responsible, you put no limit on that statement

The 147 Democrats who voted against it are not responsible for the disaster.

Nor are the 7 Republicans.

lol

That may be true, but so what? the majority in both houses voted for it, including your probable candidate for president in 16.

When will you begin demonizing hillary for supporting the iraq fiasco?

 

[Faun]

Of course I believed the Bush administration. At that time, who could imagine they were lying?

What's moronic is calling 70% of the country morons for believing them.

ROFL what a moron. This guy believed that Iraq was behind 9.11. ROFL I'll bet he believes in the tooth fairy too.

Again, you're an idiot who thinks 70% of the nation are morons for believing the Bush administration.

it was bad intel, 70% of the entire world believed it. Including both clintons who had access to exactly the same intel that Bush had.

More praise due then for the majority of Democrats who voted against the war.

The prominent dems were for it. Including both clintons. Why haven't you called them scumbags and liars? They came to the same erroneous conclusions as Bush using exactly the same intel.

43% of Congressional Democrats voted for it.

97% of Congressional Republicans voted for it.

100% of executive administration Republicans were in favor of it.

Republicans: but, but, but a bunch of Democrats voted for it too!

 

[Wildman]

A majority of Democrats in the House voted against it,

"A majority of Democrats..." i betcha can not name them, can you.., oooh, i mean without doing a joogle search.

 

[Redfish]

ROFL what a moron. This guy believed that Iraq was behind 9.11. ROFL I'll bet he believes in the tooth fairy too.

Again, you're an idiot who thinks 70% of the nation are morons for believing the Bush administration.

it was bad intel, 70% of the entire world believed it. Including both clintons who had access to exactly the same intel that Bush had.

More praise due then for the majority of Democrats who voted against the war.

The prominent dems were for it. Including both clintons. Why haven't you called them scumbags and liars? They came to the same erroneous conclusions as Bush using exactly the same intel.

43% of Congressional Democrats voted for it.

97% of Congressional Republicans voted for it.

100% of executive administration Republicans were in favor of it.

Republicans: but, but, but a bunch of Democrats voted for it too!

Again, so what? It passed. Hillary voted for it, voted to fund it, and voted to continue it. She supported Bush 100% on Iraq, as did Bubba Clinton.

So what exactly are you saying here? that the clintons were too stupid to see the truth that other dems and some republicans saw?

 

[Faun]

Of course I believed the Bush administration. At that time, who could imagine they were lying?

What's moronic is calling 70% of the country morons for believing them.

ROFL what a moron. This guy believed that Iraq was behind 9.11. ROFL I'll bet he believes in the tooth fairy too.

Again, you're an idiot who thinks 70% of the nation are morons for believing the Bush administration.

it was bad intel, 70% of the entire world believed it. Including both clintons who had access to exactly the same intel that Bush had.

You're a fucking moron. The intel informed the Bush administration that 9.11 hijacker Mohammad Atta did not meet with Iraqi officials in Prague. The intel was right. It was the Bush administration which lied about that.

Again... who would expect the Bush administration would lie and let America believe there was a connection between Iraq and 9.11, when in fact, there was no connection and the administration knew it.

You are the fucking moron, you prove it on this forum every day. So go fuck yourself asshole, you are a waste of my time dealing with your bullshit, talking points, and lies.

Translation: you can't dispute s word I said so you'll flame out instead.



Again ... what caused you to flame out because you can't refute it ... regarding the bullshit about Mohammad Atta meeting with Iraqi officials in Prague .... the intel was right. No such meeting took place. The Bush administration lied.

Oh, and you remain a fucking moron.

 

[Wildman]

dimocraps are the scum of the earth.

kinda like those huge oil spills that pollute pristine wildlife habitat.

 

[Camp]

The Democrats in the House voted against it. That is an inarguable fact.

No, "the democrats" in the House didn't, some of them didn't

You said the Democrats got us into the war. No, they didn't. The Democrats in the House voted down the resolution,

which means it was dead as far as the Democrats were concerned.

Truism, you said the Democrats are not responsible, you put no limit on that statement

The 147 Democrats who voted against it are not responsible for the disaster.

Nor are the 7 Republicans.

lol

That may be true, but so what? the majority in both houses voted for it, including your probable candidate for president in 16.

When will you begin demonizing hillary for supporting the iraq fiasco?

She lost the nomination to anti war Obama and may loose the nomination over it this time again. She doesn't need to be demonized, only disagreed with. That is the difference between radical extremist and normal people. Normal people can disagree and do not have to be brainwashed with demonizing.

 

[Wildman]

You think Democrats would lie about any of this?

that's a joke.., right? a demorat never lies..., <------<<< that too is a joke.

 

[Faun]

Again, you're an idiot who thinks 70% of the nation are morons for believing the Bush administration.

it was bad intel, 70% of the entire world believed it. Including both clintons who had access to exactly the same intel that Bush had.

More praise due then for the majority of Democrats who voted against the war.

The prominent dems were for it. Including both clintons. Why haven't you called them scumbags and liars? They came to the same erroneous conclusions as Bush using exactly the same intel.

43% of Congressional Democrats voted for it.

97% of Congressional Republicans voted for it.

100% of executive administration Republicans were in favor of it.

Republicans: but, but, but a bunch of Democrats voted for it too!

Again, so what? It passed. Hillary voted for it, voted to fund it, and voted to continue it. She supported Bush 100% on Iraq, as did Bubba Clinton.

So what exactly are you saying here? that the clintons were too stupid to see the truth that other dems and some republicans saw?

"Some Republicans??" 97% voted for it. As far as funding it while troops were in battle, it would have been treasonous to not fund the troops. That's the dumbest red-herring I've heard.

As far as what they voted for ... they voted to authorize Bush to use military force if necessary. At the time of the vote, it might have been necessary because Hussein wouldn't let the weapons inspectors into Iraq. That all changed after the inspectors went back in, had full and unfettered access, and found virtually nothing.

 

[Redfish]

ROFL what a moron. This guy believed that Iraq was behind 9.11. ROFL I'll bet he believes in the tooth fairy too.

Again, you're an idiot who thinks 70% of the nation are morons for believing the Bush administration.

it was bad intel, 70% of the entire world believed it. Including both clintons who had access to exactly the same intel that Bush had.

You're a fucking moron. The intel informed the Bush administration that 9.11 hijacker Mohammad Atta did not meet with Iraqi officials in Prague. The intel was right. It was the Bush administration which lied about that.

Again... who would expect the Bush administration would lie and let America believe there was a connection between Iraq and 9.11, when in fact, there was no connection and the administration knew it.

You are the fucking moron, you prove it on this forum every day. So go fuck yourself asshole, you are a waste of my time dealing with your bullshit, talking points, and lies.

Translation: you can't dispute s word I said so you'll flame out instead.



Again ... what caused you to flame out because you can't refute it ... regarding the bullshit about Mohammad Atta meeting with Iraqi officials in Prague .... the intel was right. No such meeting took place. The Bush administration lied.

Oh, and you remain a fucking moron.

The Atta meeting was discredited AFTER the war was authorized and funded by congress and support by Hillary.

Yes, we all agree that Iraq was a stupid waste of lives and money------------we agree.

Where we disagree is when you allege that Bush was such a wonderful communicator and orator that he convinced intelligent dems like the clintons to believe a lie.

You are either saying that Bush was the most brilliant president in history or that the clintons are butt stupid. Which is it?

 

[Redfish]

it was bad intel, 70% of the entire world believed it. Including both clintons who had access to exactly the same intel that Bush had.

More praise due then for the majority of Democrats who voted against the war.

The prominent dems were for it. Including both clintons. Why haven't you called them scumbags and liars? They came to the same erroneous conclusions as Bush using exactly the same intel.

43% of Congressional Democrats voted for it.

97% of Congressional Republicans voted for it.

100% of executive administration Republicans were in favor of it.

Republicans: but, but, but a bunch of Democrats voted for it too!

Again, so what? It passed. Hillary voted for it, voted to fund it, and voted to continue it. She supported Bush 100% on Iraq, as did Bubba Clinton.

So what exactly are you saying here? that the clintons were too stupid to see the truth that other dems and some republicans saw?

"Some Republicans??" 97% voted for it. As far as funding it while troops were in battle, it would have been treasonous to not fund the troops. That's the dumbest red-herring I've heard.

As far as what they voted for ... they voted to authorize Bush to use military force if necessary. At the time of the vote, it might have been necessary because Hussein wouldn't let the weapons inspectors into Iraq. That all changed after the inspectors went back in, had full and unfettered access, and found virtually nothing.

the inspectors never had full and unfettered access until Saddam was executed. Please stop lying, it makes you look really stupid.

 

[Wildman]

And he holds none of the guilty Democrats to any standard at all.

is there any demoscum here who holds any demorat to any set of accepted standards ?

 

[Dragonlady]

Sadden was obsessed with WMD's during the Clinton Administration. He hired that Canadian gun builder to build the world's largest cannon, Gerald somebody or other, but the guy was murdered before he finished the job. He also gassed the Kurds more than once.

However, as time went on and the effects of the sanctions took hold, Hussein seems to have stopped trying, especially after his gun builder died. Maybe people were reluctant to risk their lives to help him. Maybe he couldn't get materials. Who knows?

But Bush did know that Saddam posed no threat but he wanted Iraq's oil. That's what the war was all about. And Bush ignored all of the Intel which didn't support the belief that Iraq wasn't building WMDs. As a result, CIA personnel who didn't bring Bush what he wanted, weren't invited to briefings. Pretty soon the CIA was falling all over themselves to bring Bush what he wanted.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Again, you're an idiot who thinks 70% of the nation are morons for believing the Bush administration.

it was bad intel, 70% of the entire world believed it. Including both clintons who had access to exactly the same intel that Bush had.

More praise due then for the majority of Democrats who voted against the war.

The prominent dems were for it. Including both clintons. Why haven't you called them scumbags and liars? They came to the same erroneous conclusions as Bush using exactly the same intel.

43% of Congressional Democrats voted for it.

97% of Congressional Republicans voted for it.

100% of executive administration Republicans were in favor of it.

Republicans: but, but, but a bunch of Democrats voted for it too!

Again, so what? It passed. Hillary voted for it, voted to fund it, and voted to continue it. She supported Bush 100% on Iraq, as did Bubba Clinton.

So what exactly are you saying here? that the clintons were too stupid to see the truth that other dems and some republicans saw?

What I'm saying is that you got two terms of Barack Obama because he was smart enough to oppose the war.

Without his position being so, he would not have beaten Hillary Clinton in 2008.

 

[kaz]

Stop kazzing ... some 70% believed Hussein was involved in 9.11. Funny how so many people believed a message from the Bush administration you deny they were pushing.

Only morons thought that... are you a moron?

You're a fucking retard. There is no other explanation for how you can call 70% of Americans, "morons," for believing the president and his administration. Even funnier -- a plurality of that poll who you call morons, were righties.

Yes or no... did you or did you not think Iraq was behind 9.11? Easy question Faun. You can do it... YES [ ] or NO [ ]. Place your x.

I assure you, being a moron has nothing to do with being on the left or right of the political aisle. There are plenty of morons to go around.

Of course I believed the Bush administration. At that time, who could imagine they were lying?

What's moronic is calling 70% of the country morons for believing them.

ROFL what a moron. This guy believed that Iraq was behind 9.11. ROFL I'll bet he believes in the tooth fairy too.

OMG, you're right. He's a complete dip shit. No one who paid attention at the time thought that Iraq was behind 9/11, un freaking believable. Well Faun, this explains a lot of your posts. You actually thought that? Iraq was behind 9/11? What is wrong with you? Seriously?

You may want to start by educating yourself on these terms. Al Qaeda, The Taliban, Afghanistan. I opposed attacking Iraq. I supported attacking Afghanistan. I opposed nation building in Afghanistan, but I thought we should blow the holy hell out of Al Qaeda and The Taliban. You know why, Faun? They were behind 9/11. Wow, why don't you just put in your sig, "I am a gullible sheep?"

 

[NYcarbineer]

[

OMG, you're right. He's a complete dip shit. No one who paid attention at the time thought that Iraq was behind 9/11, un freaking believable. Well Faun, this explains a lot of your posts. You actually thought that? Iraq was behind 9/11? What is wrong with you? Seriously?

You may want to start by educating yourself on these terms. Al Qaeda, The Taliban, Afghanistan. I opposed attacking Iraq. I supported attacking Afghanistan. I opposed nation building in Afghanistan, but I thought we should blow the holy hell out of Al Qaeda and The Taliban. You know why, Faun? They were behind 9/11. Wow, why don't you just put in your sig, "I am a gullible sheep?"

lol, you're so uninformed.

From Sep 2003:


Poll: 70% believe Saddam, 9-11 link

WASHINGTON (AP) — Nearly seven in 10 Americans believe it is likely that ousted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein was personally involved in the Sept. 11 attacks, says a poll out almost two years after the terrorists' strike against this country.

Sixty-nine percent in a Washington Post poll published Saturday said they believe it is likely the Iraqi leader was personally involved in the attacks carried out by al-Qaeda. A majority of Democrats, Republicans and independents believe it's likely Saddam was involved.

The belief in the connection persists even though there has been no proof of a link between the two.

President Bush and members of his administration suggested a link between the two in the months before the war in Iraq. Claims of possible links have never been proven, however.

USATODAY.com - Poll 70 believe Saddam 9-11 link

 

[Kondor3]

Hell, Iraq wasn't about WMD, or oil, for that matter.

Iraq was about teaching a lesson to the Muslim world, after 9-11..

Picking a fight with one of Islam's few substantive military powers with whom we did not already have a good relationship...

Knock over two of our buildings, and we knock over two of your countries...

Afghanistan was already under our hammer...

Iraq was the runner-up and second choice for our object-lesson...

The lesson itself?

1. Fuck with America, and we will slaughter you at 100-to-1 or 1000-to-1 ratios, and level your cities, and destroy your infrastructure and government and society.

2. Leave us alone, and we will leave you alone.

Something for Muslim-centric political leaders - worldwide - to contemplate before hosting or shielding Militant Muslim terror-groups, or undertaking such things themselves.

Force.

The only language that the practitioners of a Warrior Religion understand, in the final analysis.

Rightly or wrongly, I sense that this was a very strong element in the decision to make war upon Iraq.

Things that American politicians and leaders cannot say openly in public.

And, if there is any appreciable element of truth to that speculation, then...

The rest of this is just the mechanics involved in making it happen.

 

[Faun]

Again, you're an idiot who thinks 70% of the nation are morons for believing the Bush administration.

it was bad intel, 70% of the entire world believed it. Including both clintons who had access to exactly the same intel that Bush had.

You're a fucking moron. The intel informed the Bush administration that 9.11 hijacker Mohammad Atta did not meet with Iraqi officials in Prague. The intel was right. It was the Bush administration which lied about that.

Again... who would expect the Bush administration would lie and let America believe there was a connection between Iraq and 9.11, when in fact, there was no connection and the administration knew it.

You are the fucking moron, you prove it on this forum every day. So go fuck yourself asshole, you are a waste of my time dealing with your bullshit, talking points, and lies.

Translation: you can't dispute s word I said so you'll flame out instead.



Again ... what caused you to flame out because you can't refute it ... regarding the bullshit about Mohammad Atta meeting with Iraqi officials in Prague .... the intel was right. No such meeting took place. The Bush administration lied.

Oh, and you remain a fucking moron.

The Atta meeting was discredited AFTER the war was authorized and funded by congress and support by Hillary.

Yes, we all agree that Iraq was a stupid waste of lives and money------------we agree.

Where we disagree is when you allege that Bush was such a wonderful communicator and orator that he convinced intelligent dems like the clintons to believe a lie.

You are either saying that Bush was the most brilliant president in history or that the clintons are butt stupid. Which is it?

Again, you are a fucking moron. Here's more proof.

Now pay attention because you just [unwittingly] confirmed what Democrats have been claiming and you righties have been firmly denying...

As you point out, that meeting wasn't discredited until after the war ... meaning Congress voted on that bill believing it was true ... but the Bush administration knew it was false since December, 2001...

Declassified white House memo on Mohammed Atta in Prague

SUBSEQUENT INVESTIGATION OF THE TRAVEL TO THE CZECH REPUBLIC OF TERRORIST MOHAMED ((ATTA)) REVEALED THAT THE INDIVIDUAL WHO ATTEMPTED TO ENTER THE CZECH REPUBLIC ON 31 MAY 2000 AT [---] AIRPORT WAS NOT THE ATTA WHO ATTACKED THE WORLD TRADE CENTER ON 11 SEPTEMBER 2001. [---] IT WAS A PAKISTANI NATIONAL [---]​

You just tacitly confessed that Democrats (and Republicans) were duped into voting to give Bush authority to use force.

 

[kaz]

Wow, great point. Democrats are fucking LIARS. You must hate them to have gotten us into that war arm in arm with W

Your non-sequitur is noted and dismissed. Now watch as I point out how failed to address anything in my post, no less, refute anything.

Meanwhile, your lie that every country thought Hussein was building WMD is thoroughly dismantled. Which of course, is why you tried to deflect with that lame non-sequitur.

So when we blame Republicans who got us into the war, blaming Democrats who got us into the war too would be a non-sequitur. Classic.

LOL, that always cracks me up when you liberals try to repeat my pointing out your logical fallacies to you, and you try to do it back and just show you don't know what the fallacies mean

Your reply to my post had nothing to do with what I posted.

That is called a "non-sequitur."

Educate yourself.

It has everything to do with what you said. I say both parties are guilty, you say no, when they did the same thing, it was all the Republicans fault. You considered applying the same standard to both parties to be a non-sequitur, that's ridiculous

21 times as many Democrats as Republicans voted against the Iraq War.

That is hardly an equal distribution of guilt.

Truism. I said both parties are guilty, you are arguing Democrats are pure as the driven snow. I never said both sides are "equally" guilty, I said both are guilty. And the Democrat leadership supported it, the Senate Democrat majority voted for it, and the House provided the margin of victory. Democrats are guilty.

Furthermore, this isn't even a standard for you, you keep voting for Democrats who voted for the war, and you are planning to do it again in this coming election. You know what you are? I'll give you a hint. It starts with "h" and ends with "ypocrite." You know what the word is?