Did you Support War in Iraq??

[NotfooledbyW]

Got it. W is responsible for his actions and choices. He is also responsible for other people's actions and choices. Because, of reasons.

You are a liar..I said W is responsible for the entire fucking disaster because others reacted to it.

You cant start a war and then walk away blaming the other side for fighting back.

You should not support invasions of other countries to destroy a peaceful situation if you don’t want to be responsible for how fucked it up gets after tearing it apart.

 

[surada]

The Iranians and insurgents were not defending themselves, ….

Says who? Iraq is a Muslim Nation that was invaded, bombed, and its people were shot at by an army and bombed by its air forces that was sent in during peacetime from a predominantly Christian nation that became an occupying army when the dictatorship fell.

Now I realize as a cultural non-religious Christian you see no justification for Muslims to resist being invaded by a Christian Army that killed many Iraqis on the way in.

they disagreed with the idea of an Iraq that was a multiethnic parliamentary democracy and they choose to wage war against the Iraqi Government and it's American ally.

They had the right to disagree with an invading army no matter what that invasion army intended and wanted them to do.

They did not start it - W did.

Iraq invaded Kuwait. Killed pillaged and raped. Then refused to give back what it stole. It fully deserved the retribution it received.

The Saudis didn't think so. They forgave the OPEC quota.

 

[Correll]

Got it. W is responsible for his actions and choices. He is also responsible for other people's actions and choices. Because, of reasons.

You are a liar..I said W is responsible for the entire fucking disaster because others reacted to it.

You cant start a war and then walk away blaming the other side for fighting back.

You should not support invasions of other countries to destroy a peaceful situation if you don’t want to be responsible for how fucked it up gets after tearing it apart.

Iran wasn't the "other side". They were a neighboring country. Many of the insurgents were not the "other side", they were outsiders who decided to come to Iraq to wage war.


And you just give them a pass for their choice and put the responsibility for their actions on W, and his supporters.


That is indefensible. And immoral.


That you lie about what I am doing, ie trying to avoid responsibility or some such shit, is just another layer of lying from you.

 

[surada]

Got it. W is responsible for his actions and choices. He is also responsible for other people's actions and choices. Because, of reasons.

You are a liar..I said W is responsible for the entire fucking disaster because others reacted to it.

You cant start a war and then walk away blaming the other side for fighting back.

You should not support invasions of other countries to destroy a peaceful situation if you don’t want to be responsible for how fucked it up gets after tearing it apart.

Iran wasn't the "other side". They were a neighboring country. Many of the insurgents were not the "other side", they were outsiders who decided to come to Iraq to wage war.


And you just give them a pass for their choice and put the responsibility for their actions on W, and his supporters.


That is indefensible. And immoral.


That you lie about what I am doing, ie trying to avoid responsibility or some such shit, is just another layer of lying from you.

Iran was the other side.. You should probably read up on the Dual Containment Policy.

 

[9thIDdoc]

I mean they have only waged war on your country, they have not been a problem for your partisan and ideological agenda.

There was only one leader of a nation on March 19 2003 who decided to start a war by bombing and invading a nation that at the time was being peacefully disarmed by the UNSC at the time for several months. Keyword = PEACEFUL.

No nation was waging war against the United States except The Taliban In Afghanistan and they were driven out of power with partial Iran’s help.


But this reflects how Iran saw the US invasion of its western neighbor.

*** In March 2003, the United States did for Iran what Iran itself tried but failed to achieve after eight long years of bloody war with Iraq, namely to overthrow Saddam Husayn.

*** https://www.wilsoncenter.org/sites/default/files/media/documents/event/MohsenMilaniFinal.pdf

*** As a result of this momentous event, the strategic cards in the Persian Gulf were shuffled, creating new opportunities as well as existential threats for Iran. On the one hand, Iraq, Iran’s archenemy, was defeated and its historically oppressed Shi’i majority—a potential ally for Iran—was liberated and energized, and Iran solidified its position as the most powerful indigenous force in the region. On the other hand, the United States virtually encircled Iran with its more than 150,000 troops in Iraq and Afghanistan, elevating Iran’s threat perception to an

There was nothing "peaceful" about Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait and it's violation of the cease fire agreement continued that war. If Iraq didn't want war it shouldn't have started and then continued one. It may have been a mistake to allow Iraq to continue as a nation. Maybe we should have made it a part of Kuwait.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

There was nothing "peaceful" about Iraq's invasion and occupation of Kuwait

What year was that? I never said Iraq was peaceful that year. Iraq was peaceful and was cooperating with 200 UN inspectors who were disarming Iraq peacefully when W broke the peace and started the violence in Iraq that caused half a million Iraqis to die.

Those are facts. Indisputable facts.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

If Iraq didn't want war it shouldn't have started and then continued one.

You are a liar. Iraq did not continue the war.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Maybe we should have made it a part of Kuwait.

Maybe you should not support killing innocent people in order to rearrange the world to your liking. HW formed a coalition got a UN mandate, drove Iraq’s army out of Kuwait and pulled out when the mission was accomplished. I supported that at the time and still do.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Iran wasn't the "other side".

They were 1/3 of the Axis of EVIL. That is the other side. They had no part in the 9/11 attacks and supported the Shiite insurgency against the invading Army in Iraq after W sent them there.

IF W did not send US troops into Iraq, Iran would not have supported an insurgency against them.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Many of the insurgents were not the "other side", they were outsiders who decided to come to Iraq to wage war.

And what made outsiders including al-Qaeda decide to come into Iraq?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

And you just give them a pass for their choice

You are a liar. They get no pass from me. I’m only saying that W is responsible for outsider insurgents and telling them to bring the attacks against American Troops on.


** BUSH: Let me finish. There are some who feel like — that the conditions are such that they can attack us there. My answer is, bring ’em on. We’ve got the force necessary to deal with the security situation.


Yeah! Right you did!

 

[NotfooledbyW]

And you just give them a pass for their choice and put the responsibility for their actions on W, and his supporters.


That is indefensible. And immoral.

Why are W and his warmonger supporters like you not responsible for creating the conditions that incubated an insurgency in Iraq following the US invasion to disarm Iraq of WMD.


“I've not made up our mind about military action. Hopefully, this can be done peacefully.

President George Bush Discusses Iraq in National Press Conference

<a href="/news/releases/2003/03/20030306-8.v.smil"></a>Good evening. I'm pleased to take your questions tonight, and to discuss with the American people the serious matters facing our country and the world.

georgewbush-whitehouse.archives.gov

Hopefully, that as a result of the pressure that we have placed -- and others have placed -- that Saddam will disarm and/or leave the country.”

 

[NotfooledbyW]

you have been USING the dead, desecrating them, verbally,

That’s an interesting mutilated rationality that the people that you supported killing are being verbally desecrated when I object to your rationale that killing them was necessary so they can ‘live’ in a democratic nation that you will build for them.

You say I’m desecrating the half a million Iraqis that that ended up dead due to W’s decision to disarm Iraq of WMD by a war of aggression and incompetent occupation of Iraq that you supported and continue to support the invasion that caused their unnecessary deaths. I’m speaking for them because they can’t because you supported the world leader when he decided that some Iraqis needed to become collateral damage in a war to disarm Iraq violently.

 

[9thIDdoc]

If Iraq didn't want war it shouldn't have started and then continued one.

You are a liar. Iraq did not continue the war.

You are the liar. Iraq failed to abide by the cease fire agreement although given chance after chance to do so over a ten year period and then ignored a UN ultimatum. So the war continued. A cease fire is a provisional pause in hostilities; not a peace treaty. History is quite clear. In the end Saddam was the one responsible for the Iraqi deaths like so many others. Iraq started the war and continued it. It has no one to blame but itself.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

then ignored a UN ultimatum.

You are a liar. IRAQ was not ‘at war’ with any nation up to and after the date 1441 was passed in November 2002.

Bush said he wanted to disarm Iraq peacefully up until March 10, 2003. POWELL said War was not inevitable at the same time when he said Iraq was cooperating.

*** MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: “And if it does, {cooperate) war is not inevitable?”

Interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos

2001-2009.state.gov

*** SECRETARY POWELL: We've never said that war is inevitable. The President has always said that he is interested in a peaceful solution.

If “WAR” was not inevitable in December 2002 with 200 UN inspectors on the ground inside Iraq with Iraq cooperating according to Secretary Powell, how were we ‘at war’ with Iraq in December 2002?

You are a liar. Iraq did not ignore 1441. Iraq was in FACT cooperating with 200 UN inspectors 2.5 months prior to the invasion AND war was not inevitable according to Sec of State Colin Powell:

*** Colin Powell's remarks on ABC's This Week with George Stephanoplous: war is not “inevitable” DECEMBER 2002

Interview on ABC's This Week with George Stephanopoulos

2001-2009.state.gov

*** SECRETARY POWELL: “They have been cooperating with the inspectors and we'll see if that cooperation continues.”

(1) Is the ceasefire agreement with the United States or with the United Nations?

(2) Are you saying Iraq was at war with the United Nations ever since 1991?

(3) Where are you getting such language? Does QAnon have an international law branch now too?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

A cease fire is a provisional pause in hostilities; not a peace treaty.

You are a liar..The Ceasefire went into effect on April 6 1991 when Iraq accepted the terms.

*** {Resolution 687 was passed by 12 votes to one against (Cuba) with two abstentions from Ecuador and Yemen after a very extended meeting. Iraq accepted the provisions of the resolution on 6 April 1991}

Iraq was found several times by the Council to be in Material Breach of its disarmament obligations and under your sanctions, but the ceasefire between Iraq and Kuwait was not broken. There was no continuation of war after April 6 1991. You lied about the continuation of war.

FACT: Iraq was peacefully cooperating with almost on 200 UN inspectors when W decided to replace the peaceful inspectors with military. There was no continuation of war. Iraq was in Material Breach of its disarmament obligations but wax given a Final Opportunity to Comply Under 1441 and be disarmed peacefully.


FACT: W gives Iraq a final opportunity to cooperate and be disarmed.

{President George W. Bush
The Rose Garden, The White House Washington, DC
November 8, 2002

Text of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441
Good morning. With the resolution just passed, the United Nations Security Council has met important responsibilities, upheld its principles and given clear and fair notice that Saddam Hussein must fully disclose and destroy his weapons of mass destruction}

 

[Correll]

Got it. W is responsible for his actions and choices. He is also responsible for other people's actions and choices. Because, of reasons.

You are a liar..I said W is responsible for the entire fucking disaster because others reacted to it.

You cant start a war and then walk away blaming the other side for fighting back.

You should not support invasions of other countries to destroy a peaceful situation if you don’t want to be responsible for how fucked it up gets after tearing it apart.

Iran wasn't the "other side". They were a neighboring country. Many of the insurgents were not the "other side", they were outsiders who decided to come to Iraq to wage war.


And you just give them a pass for their choice and put the responsibility for their actions on W, and his supporters.


That is indefensible. And immoral.


That you lie about what I am doing, ie trying to avoid responsibility or some such shit, is just another layer of lying from you.

Iran was the other side.. You should probably read up on the Dual Containment Policy.

Funny, I thought we were talking about the war. We didn't invade Iran. But they CHOOSE to get involved and wage war.


But strangely, you don't respond to them choosing an optional war, the way you did with President Bush doing so.


Almost like you only care about it, when you can use it to smear your partisan and ideological enemies.


EXACTLY like that, in fact.

 

[Correll]

Iran wasn't the "other side".

They were 1/3 of the Axis of EVIL. That is the other side. They had no part in the 9/11 attacks and supported the Shiite insurgency against the invading Army in Iraq after W sent them there.

IF W did not send US troops into Iraq, Iran would not have supported an insurgency against them.

They could have stood aside and waited out the policy of containment.


Instead they choose to wage war, when it was "not the last resort", which, when President Bush did it, caused you to go into drama queen mode, citing "omg the children" and now suddenly, it's completely understandable.


Your hypocrisy, is like a mountain and an ocean combined. Higher than a man can climb, yet deeper than he can swim, and vast as the night.


See, I can be poetic to. I just don't use dead children to do so.

 

[surada]

Iran wasn't the "other side".

They were 1/3 of the Axis of EVIL. That is the other side. They had no part in the 9/11 attacks and supported the Shiite insurgency against the invading Army in Iraq after W sent them there.

IF W did not send US troops into Iraq, Iran would not have supported an insurgency against them.

They could have stood aside and waited out the policy of containment.


Instead they choose to wage war, when it was "not the last resort", which, when President Bush did it, caused you to go into drama queen mode, citing "omg the children" and now suddenly, it's completely understandable.


Your hypocrisy, is like a mountain and an ocean combined. Higher than a man can climb, yet deeper than he can swim, and vast as the night.


See, I can be poetic to. I just don't use dead children to do so.

Oh please. Iraq was crippled by 2 decades of war and sanctions before Bush's invasion.

 

[Correll]

Many of the insurgents were not the "other side", they were outsiders who decided to come to Iraq to wage war.

And what made outsiders including al-Qaeda decide to come into Iraq?

The presence of people they hate, Christians.

Why? Are you saying that is a good reason, a JUST WAR reason? Enough of a reason to "kill innocent civilians, including children"?


Cause, when President Bush choose an optional war, you went into drama queen mode.