Did you Support War in Iraq??

[Correll]

The Iraqi government was supporting terrorism at that time.

You made a specific accusation that was used to justify killing half a million Iraqis as an 'honest mistake' so I asked for evidence to back up ....

No, you didn't. You cherry picked one terrorist group and posted a claim that Iraq did NOT "directly" support them, and then pretended that that proved that I was wrong, or lying, I forget which one, and then built a fantasy on top of that and was an asshole about it.


You are insane. Even if you were able to "prove" today, somehow that Iraq, under Saddam never supported any terrorists, that would only prove that I was mistaken about it back then.

It would not change anything.


That you think it would, is you being bat shit crazy.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Irrelevant spam

Its direct quotes from the people that lied to you. There was no honest mistake.

 

[Correll]

Irrelevant spam

Its direct quotes from the people that lied to you. There was no honest mistake.

Have you ever heard of the phrase, "humans are an irrational, pattern seeking animal."?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Irrelevant spam

Why did you state that Iraq’s regime was supporting terrorists after 1441?

 

[Correll]

Irrelevant spam

Why did you state that Iraq’s regime was supporting terrorists after 1441?

i was thinking of the way they gave money to the families of suicide bombers.

Took you long enough to ask.

You made yourself look silly with your guesses and knee jerk assumptions.


Learn anything here?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

i was thinking of the way they gave money to the families of suicide bombers.

When?

You said the Iraqi government was supporting terrorists “at that time” .. which was March 2003.

I’ll ask again do you have evidence that Iraq was giving money to terrorists families of suicide bombers after 1441?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

i was thinking of the way they gave money to the families of suicide bombers.

That was apparently not considered a reason for regime change for the Bush Administration..

U.S. ‘ALLY’ PAYS BOMBERS – SAUDIS JUST LIKE SADDAM​

By Niles Lathem
April 11, 2002 | 4:00am


WASHINGTON – Saudi Arabia has joined Saddam Hussein in giving “blood money” to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers – a policy that could complicate relations between America and one of its principal Arab allies.
A statement on the Web site run by the Saudi Embassy in Washington said the kingdom has paid a total of $33 million to Palestinians for various uses, including cash payments to educate the children of “martyrs,” since October 2000.
The Saudis give $5,333 to each martyr’s family and $4,000 to each Palestinian who is wounded battling Israeli forces.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

What is your plan for dealing with muslim terorrism?

I replied referencing a time. .......to start a Judeo -Christianity based nation building project on their sovereign land in Iraq. That was clearly after 1441,

But you are a liar. They were not terrorists when you decided to kill half a million of them to start a Judeo -Christianity based nation building project on their sovereign land in Iraq.

And again I , was referring to a timeframe after 1441

We were not attacked by or threatened in any way by Iraq in March 2003, so why did you beat the drums to start a war there in March 2003 if you know War sucks. You make no sense.

You did not clarify that you were talking about forever......

1. They were terrorists

Here I asked for evidence.

You decided it was necessary to kill Iraqis (it turned out to be half a million) because you determined they were terrorists? What evidence did you have that convinced you that Iraqis were terrorists.

You lied to pretend that you had evidence. It it was payments to the families of suicide bombers why didn't you present some evidence here:

Why? So you can pretend

Here you specifically said "at that time" you did not clarify that you were changing the timeframe in the conversation .... And again I , was referring to a timeframe after 1441

The Iraqi government was supporting terrorism at that time.

So I asked for clarification.

When you are saying "at that time" do you mean the Month of March 2003 when Bush decided it was necessary to invade? Just want to be clear.

You still didn't object to the timeframe being discussed. And again I , was referring to a timeframe after 1441

We were discussing my point that the Iraqis Government supported terrorism

Here you only clarified that your statement was not based on facts or evidence. Just a general statement ..... still talking about a timeframe after 1441

I made a general statement that they supported terrorists.

Why did you state that Iraq’s regime was supporting terrorists after 1441?

You finally claimed you were talking about payments to suicide bombers.

i was thinking of the way they gave money to the families of suicide bombers.

You said the Iraqi government was supporting terrorists “at that time” .. which was March 2003.

Then you added your that you were not talking about what Saddam did after 1441 although that was the understanding of what the discussion was from the beginning to this point.

nope. A more general time. Think post First Persian Gulf War, forward.

Do you see the FACT that you lied? Your posts never indicated that you were talking 1991 though November 2002 when 1441 was approved.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

i was thinking of the way they gave money to the families of suicide bombers.

Is this a guy in the White House a terrorist too.

1/11/03

Bush tells Saudi ambassador Prince Bandar that he plans to go to war two days before he tells Secretary Powell. [Date the public knew: 4/18/04]

 

[NotfooledbyW]

You asked for my plan how I would deal with the real terrorists in March 2003 and I gave you a better plan than yours which was to invade Iraq to nation build with an army that was not equipped or prepared to nation build. You are the one that had no plan to deal with real terrorists. Real terrorists were not in Iraq or working with the Iraqi regime.

In March 2003 the plan was let the inspectors deal with SH and his WMD issue who had nothing to do with the 09/11/01 attacks. Finish the job in Afghanistan and pursue OBL in Pakistan while cleaning out the real terrorists hiding in the no man’s land on the Pakistan/Afghanistan border.

And Don’t spend $5 trillion and 250,000 troops and most of our intelligence assets in Iraq that didn’t have any WMD. That’s was the plan.

Six out of ten Americans agreed with letting the inspections continue. You say you spoke for America demanding the inspections needed to end on March 17 2003 for no reason whatsoever regarding an increase in the threat from Iraq.

How do figure you spoke for America?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

We HAD a robust discussion on the policy before the invasion.

That was impossible because #1 the Bush Administration lied to the public about the threat that he used to justify preemptive war..

That was impossible because #2 even after all this time you insist your pre-invasion support for war was based on the best argument for war, which was to create a functioning democracy in the ME to be a powerful ideological challenge to Islamic Extremism. Iraq just happened to be a good candidate for that you said

That was impossible because #3 you answered my question with a yay.

Would you have still supported the war based on nation building in the event that United Nations Security Council inspectors had successfully disarmed Iraq being declared in full compliance with all United Nations Security Council resolutions as described in 1441?

2. Yes. I found the WMD argument to be unconvincing at the time. WMDs are World War ONE technology, and I do not believe that we can restrict access to that level of technology. The idea of an rebuttal to the ideological argument of Islamic Fundamentalism was the more convincing argument to me.

That was impossible because #4 there was no debate from your neocon PNAC, Cheney, Christopher Hitchens, lust for Saddam Hussein’s blood which was aroused by al Qaeda even though the DIctator had no ties to the 911 attacks that set Chris Hitchens. Your views on Iraq are so in line with the atheist Marxist neocon Iraq war monger now deceased I can hardly tell you apart.

“An earlier anti-war demand—”Give the Inspectors More Time”—was also very prescient and is also about to be fulfilled in exquisite detail.

Giving Peace a Chance The war critics were right—not in the way they expected. BY CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS APRIL 09, 2003 4:10 PM​

Now the inspectors are well and truly in, there’s no further need for an embargo.”​

There was no debate whether the inspections should continue or be booted out by the USA.

That yuh saying there was a debate - is one of your absurdities on Iraq A myth.

The person making the decision was too busy lying to be bothered with debating those Trumpo hinking it wise to be absolutely certain the wmd intelligence was absolutely correct before starting a war to find .
then.

How could we have a debate with people like you and Hitchens who didn’t care if SH had none x C at all. You relished taking SH down for the sake of taking him down.

 

[Correll]

i was thinking of the way they gave money to the families of suicide bombers.

When?

You said the Iraqi government was supporting terrorists “at that time” .. which was March 2003.

I’ll ask again do you have evidence that Iraq was giving money to terrorists families of suicide bombers after 1441?

Did I say "at the time" or did you add that? DOesn't matter. That was my motive at the time. YOu can't change that by rehashing it, now.


The most you could do, is possibly prove that I was wrong about that.

And if so, so what? It doesn't change the fact that I believed it then?


That you think that you can change the past with arguments NOW, is literally insane of you.


Liberalism, really is a mental disorder.

 

[Correll]

i was thinking of the way they gave money to the families of suicide bombers.

That was apparently not considered a reason for regime change for the Bush Administration..

U.S. ‘ALLY’ PAYS BOMBERS – SAUDIS JUST LIKE SADDAM​

By Niles Lathem
April 11, 2002 | 4:00am


WASHINGTON – Saudi Arabia has joined Saddam Hussein in giving “blood money” to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers – a policy that could complicate relations between America and one of its principal Arab allies.
A statement on the Web site run by the Saudi Embassy in Washington said the kingdom has paid a total of $33 million to Palestinians for various uses, including cash payments to educate the children of “martyrs,” since October 2000.
The Saudis give $5,333 to each martyr’s family and $4,000 to each Palestinian who is wounded battling Israeli forces.

Funny, did you forget you were asking me about my reasons?

See, that is just one of the ways you libtards are so dishonest.

You were trying to make a point about MY support for a past policy, and when I answer you seriously and honestly, you pivot and make a "counter point" that the BUSH administration did not care about that.


That is you being dishonest, and you have been an asshole about it.


If you were not a dishonest and cowardly partisan hack, you would have conceded that point and moved on to some other point to make your case.



But, for some reason, you never do that.


Probably because on some level, you realize that all your points are bullshit.

 

[Correll]

What is your plan for dealing with muslim terorrism?

I replied referencing a time. .......to start a Judeo -Christianity based nation building project on their sovereign land in Iraq. That was clearly after 1441,

But you are a liar. They were not terrorists when you decided to kill half a million of them to start a Judeo -Christianity based nation building project on their sovereign land in Iraq.

And again I , was referring to a timeframe after 1441

We were not attacked by or threatened in any way by Iraq in March 2003, so why did you beat the drums to start a war there in March 2003 if you know War sucks. You make no sense.

You did not clarify that you were talking about forever......

1. They were terrorists

Here I asked for evidence.

You decided it was necessary to kill Iraqis (it turned out to be half a million) because you determined they were terrorists? What evidence did you have that convinced you that Iraqis were terrorists.

You lied to pretend that you had evidence. It it was payments to the families of suicide bombers why didn't you present some evidence here:

Why? So you can pretend

Here you specifically said "at that time" you did not clarify that you were changing the timeframe in the conversation .... And again I , was referring to a timeframe after 1441

The Iraqi government was supporting terrorism at that time.

So I asked for clarification.

When you are saying "at that time" do you mean the Month of March 2003 when Bush decided it was necessary to invade? Just want to be clear.

You still didn't object to the timeframe being discussed. And again I , was referring to a timeframe after 1441

We were discussing my point that the Iraqis Government supported terrorism

Here you only clarified that your statement was not based on facts or evidence. Just a general statement ..... still talking about a timeframe after 1441

I made a general statement that they supported terrorists.

Why did you state that Iraq’s regime was supporting terrorists after 1441?

You finally claimed you were talking about payments to suicide bombers.

i was thinking of the way they gave money to the families of suicide bombers.

You said the Iraqi government was supporting terrorists “at that time” .. which was March 2003.

Then you added your that you were not talking about what Saddam did after 1441 although that was the understanding of what the discussion was from the beginning to this point.

nope. A more general time. Think post First Persian Gulf War, forward.

Do you see the FACT that you lied? Your posts never indicated that you were talking 1991 though November 2002 when 1441 was approved.

i see the "FACT" that you are talking in circles and playing lots of gotcha word games.


This was nearly twenty years ago and you are grilling me for details. You are just being an asshole now.


My point stands. My question stands.


What is your plan for dealing with Muslim Terrorism?

 

[Correll]

i was thinking of the way they gave money to the families of suicide bombers.

Is this a guy in the White House a terrorist too.

1/11/03

Bush tells Saudi ambassador Prince Bandar that he plans to go to war two days before he tells Secretary Powell. [Date the public knew: 4/18/04]

You are just throwing shit against a wall like a monkey.

Yes. Saudi Arabia is a shitty country TOO.


Are you pretending to be so retarded that you forgot all the other shit we have been talking about with regard to Iraq, or even all the other shit we have NOT discussed that was discussed back then?/

There were dishonest assholes then who said, "well if support of terrorism is why, then why not saudi arabia"


The reasons were discussed at length then. You are being an asshole, pretending to not know them.


This is the type of dishonest shit someone does, when they know they have lost a debate.


Show some balls. Admit it.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Funny, did you forget you were asking me about my reasons?

no one loves whine more than a neocon warmonger.

I was asking for reasons that you supported the timing of the decision by Bush to invade on March 17 2003. I am asking you that because you have indicated that your support for invading was not related to the threat to our safety if SH was in possession of the most lethal weapons ever devised.

We lived with the continued threat of SH in power in Iraq for 12 years - in MARCH 2003 that threat was lower than ever - and your plan for reducing the threat was years of nation building away. Far into the distant future.

I’m trying to get you to grasp the serious flaw in your logic that the invasion was an honest mistake.

You have abandoned your concerns as an American citizen that military force should only be used as a response to an imminent or immediate or potential threat that must be immediately stopped.

You have accepted the use of massive military force (killing innocent civilians to achieve our national security goals) to reconstruct a sovereign nation and its society in our image.

With that new norm your “honest mistake” defense is more egregious than your other fictionalized “honest mistake” defenses. Such as saying the intelligence community made honest mistakes regarding WMD and ties to real terrorists.

It is a most egregious and fundamentally flawed argument based on your acceptance of the timing of the March 17 2003 to start the Iraq nation building project without questioning the ineptitude as you do.

I’m not referring to the peaceful disarming of Iraq questions with you at this point.

You have shown no remorse or anger at the fact that Bush launched the project you hold so dear before the military and civil service rebuilding plan and assets were prepared for such a major undertaking.

You supported breaking Iraq with no consideration of how it was going to be fixed. The human suffering was magnified many times over what it should have been - If Bush waited to start the nation building project until the aftermath of toppling the dictatorship was fully planned and resourced.

It was evil to put our military in an ad hoc nation building role by choosing the start date for political election cycle reasons.

You cant tell me why Bush chose March 2003
to start nation building Iraq.

Your argument that Americans ran out of patience is a lie.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

This was nearly twenty years ago and you are grilling me for details.

But you’ve been saying these the past few weeks that decision to start nation building on March 17, 2003 through the use of massive military force was an honest mistake.

When you can’t defend your present day arguments you cry foul And try to shut down the debate. I’m fully aware of your tactics.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Yes. Saudi Arabia is a shitty country TOO.

You are a neocon like Christopher Hitchens right? Why did you stop in Baghdad? From there you could’ve launched to Tehran. Next stop Damascus. By then Mecca and Riyadh would’ve been a piece of cake. Hell with Iraq and Saudi Arabia’s oil we could re-rebuild the entire world from Pakistan To the Sinai desert.

Had we confiscated all the oil even Trump would embrace your plan.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Biden voted for the war, Chuck and nancy too

As a white cultural Christian and diehard conservative Correll can you explain to me why all the Iraq war mongering conservatives that supported the invasion of Iraq are so emphatic about reminding us that many Democrats voted for the war too. (Nancy didn’t) That is of course forgetting that the authorization to use military force in Iraq had the caveat “if necessary“.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I fully supported taking out Saddam, but I supported using special forces and more covert operations then a fully scale war.

As a white cultural Christian and diehard conservative and Trump supporter Correll can you explain to struth why “full scale” war including the killing of innocent civilians was necessary to the decision on March 17 2003 to start a nation building project in Iraq on that date in history.

Special Forces in lieu of massive military force (killing innocent civilians) with the intent to reconstruct a Muslim nation and its society in our Judeo/ Christian cultural image would have reduced collateral damage on the civilian population for sure. But without the presence of massive military force the chaos in the hornets nest once Hussain‘s government structure was gone would have been horrific. More horrific than it actually was because Bush didn’t send enough troops to do proper nation building at the beginning.

Maybe you two Trump supporting warmongers can’t communicate better than I can from outside the cult of Trump’s personality.

Can you explain to your fellow conservative that going in with special forces would never have made sense or work because the first objective of the invading army was to behead the regime but most importantly was to secure the WMD so IT didn’t fall into the hands of terrorists.

WILL you do that @Corral? Or do you not agree that Massive military force was not required to nation build in Iraq.