Iraq War Cost US 2 Trillion dollars, 200,000 lives. What a waste.

[Faun]

was viet nam a crime against humanity? before you answer remember is was started and expanded by democrats.

Eisenhower was a Democrat?? Who knew?

Ike sent in a handful of advisors.

Sounds like we're in agreement ... Eisenhower started it. Not to mention, it was Eisenhower who supported the Geneva Accords of 1954 to divide Vietnam and prop up the government in the south, all due to the ridiculous fear of the spread of Communism. Had Eisenhower not done that, it's very likely the U.S. would not have had a war there.

The WAR in viet nam belongs to Kennedy and Johnson--democrats. it was ended by Nixon--a republican.

Wrong again in that Kennedy did nothing Eisenhower didn't do, except to a larger degree. It's baffling how you can blame Kennedy, but not Eisenhower, for doing the same thing.

It anyone gets the blame for the Vietnam War, it's Johnson. He's the one who actually escalated Vietnam into a full blown war. And he lied to do so, to boot.

 

[healthmyths]

82 (40%) of 208 Democratic Representatives voted for the resolution

58% of Dem Senators vote for the resolution.
21 of 50 Democratic senators voted against the resolution: Sens. Akaka (D-HI), Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Byrd (D-WV), Conrad (D-ND), Corzine (D-NJ), Dayton (D-MN), Durbin (D-IL), Feingold (D-WI), Graham (D-FL), Inouye (D-HI), Kennedy (D-MA), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), Reed (D-RI), Sarbanes (D-MD), Stabenow (D-MI), Wellstone (D-MN), and Wyden (D-OR).

But the start of the war was never the issue! It was over in less then 6 weeks!

What kept it going was the biased liberal media telling americans the Iraq was in these Democrats leaders words:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D) "Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.
Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

These statements DID ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD for the moral of US TROOPS and EVERYTHING to recruit more terrorists!

REPEATED constantly by the MSM and nightly news showing ALL the bad things our troops were doing... THE WAR DRUG ON!
3,000 more USA lives lost .. $600 billion more then budgeted spent... ALL because the MSM and Democrats wanted the WH!
To hell with our troops... after all THEY ARE TERRORISTS according Kerry. Our troops required death per Obama because we "killed civilians"!!!

All of these words of encouragement added to the deaths and costs and prolonged the conflict for 6 more years!
NO major conflict the USA had been involved like this was ever prolonged like this due to the MSM and democrats ENCOURAGING the terrorists with the above leaders telling everyone what bad people Bush/US troops are and no wonder it continued!

 

[Mr. Shaman]

was viet nam a crime against humanity? before you answer remember is was started and expanded by democrats.

Eisenhower was a Democrat?? Who knew?

Ike sent in a handful of advisors. The WAR in viet nam belongs to Kennedy and Johnson--democrats.

Try, again.

It was TRUMAN.

 

[Faun]

82 (40%) of 208 Democratic Representatives voted for the resolution

58% of Dem Senators vote for the resolution.
21 of 50 Democratic senators voted against the resolution: Sens. Akaka (D-HI), Bingaman (D-NM), Boxer (D-CA), Byrd (D-WV), Conrad (D-ND), Corzine (D-NJ), Dayton (D-MN), Durbin (D-IL), Feingold (D-WI), Graham (D-FL), Inouye (D-HI), Kennedy (D-MA), Leahy (D-VT), Levin (D-MI), Mikulski (D-MD), Murray (D-WA), Reed (D-RI), Sarbanes (D-MD), Stabenow (D-MI), Wellstone (D-MN), and Wyden (D-OR).

But the start of the war was never the issue! It was over in less then 6 weeks!

What kept it going was the biased liberal media telling americans the Iraq was in these Democrats leaders words:
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D) "Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.
Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

These statements DID ABSOLUTELY NO GOOD for the moral of US TROOPS and EVERYTHING to recruit more terrorists!

REPEATED constantly by the MSM and nightly news showing ALL the bad things our troops were doing... THE WAR DRUG ON!
3,000 more USA lives lost .. $600 billion more then budgeted spent... ALL because the MSM and Democrats wanted the WH!
To hell with our troops... after all THEY ARE TERRORISTS according Kerry. Our troops required death per Obama because we "killed civilians"!!!

All of these words of encouragement added to the deaths and costs and prolonged the conflict for 6 more years!
NO major conflict the USA had been involved like this was ever prolonged like this due to the MSM and democrats ENCOURAGING the terrorists with the above leaders telling everyone what bad people Bush/US troops are and no wonder it continued!

That's what I said ... 110 Democrats voted for it and 147 voted against it.

Most Democrats were against giving Bush the authority to use military force in Iraq.

 

[depotoo]

Unlike you, I don't lust after the blood of innocent men, women and kids in faraway lands.

So..yeah..it was a crime.

To you..it was a video game.

Cheers.

Iraq was a stupid mistake, but it was not a criminal act. congress authorized it, democrats supported it, the UN supported it, as did the UK, the EU, Japan, Spain, Russia, and every other major nation in the world.

You Bush haters need to get your history correct.

It's not about "hating" Bush..it's about international protocol.

The US attacked, invaded and occupied a country that did not attack it first.

The UN would not sanction this action.

Yeah..it was a crime.

so I guess Saddam attacking our planes in the no-fly zone was ok, according to you, huh?
Iraqi fire at ONW Aircraft
and none of this meant anything either, did it?

ANNEX D - ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

UNSCOM - Report to the Security Council - 25 January 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNEX D

ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

 

[Borillar]

Iraq was a stupid mistake, but it was not a criminal act. congress authorized it, democrats supported it, the UN supported it, as did the UK, the EU, Japan, Spain, Russia, and every other major nation in the world.

You Bush haters need to get your history correct.

It's not about "hating" Bush..it's about international protocol.

The US attacked, invaded and occupied a country that did not attack it first.

The UN would not sanction this action.

Yeah..it was a crime.

so I guess Saddam attacking our planes in the no-fly zone was ok, according to you, huh?
Iraqi fire at ONW Aircraft
and none of this meant anything either, did it?

ANNEX D - ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

UNSCOM - Report to the Security Council - 25 January 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNEX D

ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

No coalition aircraft were ever shot down by Iraqi forces. Coalition forces responded to these attacks by taking out Iraqi air defense elements. That is a proportionate response. Full scale invasion is not a proportionate response.

 

[depotoo]

It's not about "hating" Bush..it's about international protocol.

The US attacked, invaded and occupied a country that did not attack it first.

The UN would not sanction this action.

Yeah..it was a crime.

so I guess Saddam attacking our planes in the no-fly zone was ok, according to you, huh?
Iraqi fire at ONW Aircraft
and none of this meant anything either, did it?

ANNEX D - ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

UNSCOM - Report to the Security Council - 25 January 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNEX D

ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

No coalition aircraft were ever shot down by Iraqi forces. Coalition forces responded to these attacks by taking out Iraqi air defense elements. That is a proportionate response. Full scale invasion is not a proportionate response.

Oh, so they have to actually down our planes before they are a real threat? Got it.
And I guess our take out of the air defenses was pretty bad, considering they shot at aircraft over 206 times and even after that...
So they are mobile with their missiles and we can't take them out but we are to allow them to continue to shoot them at us.

Q: Mr. Secretary, you both said earlier this month that these attacks, these increased attacks by the United States and Britain had degraded Iraqi air defenses, and yet they continue to fire AAA missiles, other weapons at you. How much have these air defenses been degraded? How close --

Rumsfeld: Not enough.

Q: Well, then why not launch a strike similar to the major strikes you launched in the southern zone not this past February but the previous February, against the integrated Iraqi missile defense?

Rumsfeld: Needless to say, one has to ask those kinds of questions from time to time. The -- there are obviously a lot of considerations, but the -- for the most part, what they are using -- both their radars and their surface-to-air missiles and their artillery -- are mobile. And that, obviously, complicates it unless you engage in a fairly substantial effort.

Q: Why release this --

Myers: Yeah, can I just --

Q: Sorry.

Myers: Let me just take a stab at that, too, Charlie. One of the areas where the regime has put a lot of emphasis since the oil- for-food program has been on the air defense piece of it. And they've improved their communications. We've talked before about the fiber- optic -- going to fiber-optics, as opposed to other means. They've got a pretty good supply of long-range radars. They don't often move the surface-to-air missiles into the no-fly/no-drive zones. And when they do, they move them around very, very quickly.

No comments on the second link I included...

 

[healthmyths]

It's not about "hating" Bush..it's about international protocol.

The US attacked, invaded and occupied a country that did not attack it first.

The UN would not sanction this action.

Yeah..it was a crime.

so I guess Saddam attacking our planes in the no-fly zone was ok, according to you, huh?
Iraqi fire at ONW Aircraft
and none of this meant anything either, did it?

ANNEX D - ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

UNSCOM - Report to the Security Council - 25 January 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNEX D

ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

No coalition aircraft were ever shot down by Iraqi forces. Coalition forces responded to these attacks by taking out Iraqi air defense elements. That is a proportionate response. Full scale invasion is not a proportionate response.

YOU obviously weren't around right after 9/11 were you?
When Iraq cheered the deaths of 3,000 people!
You obviously weren't around when the Anthrax attacks occurred and NO ONE knew whether they were under Saddam's orders or what ! After all he GASSED his own people so why wouldn't he after cheering 9/11 do further terrorists attacks!

BUT OF course IDIOTS like you with your 20/20 hindsight were NO where to tell Americans that:
A) Saddam who after 200 times shooting our planes
B) Invading Kuwait then signing a 1991 Cease fire..
C) That the Anthrax attacks weren't by him...
WHERE WERE YOU THEN?

When these Democrats asking for Bush to do something???
32 democrat quotes indicate even before GWB that Saddam was a threat!

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.

Explain why Clinton said this after bombing Iraq???
In the first three months of 1999, U.S. led-forces bombarded Iraq with 241,000 pounds of bombsjust shy of the 253,000 pounds dropped under President Bush in the eight months leading up to the final UN resolution before the war.
The Raw Story | Clinton bombing of Iraq far exceeded Bush's in run-up to war; Bush 'spikes of activity' questioned
By August of 1999, American and British pilots had fired more than 1,100 missiles against 359 targets that year alone.
THIS WAS ALL DONE BY CLINTON...
So based on Clinton's experience oh and just a little called 9/11
What the f...k would you have done differently!
YOU had Saddam a murderer of 50,000 kurds, who destroyed Mesopotamia displacing 500,000 people his sons using drills on tongues.. and
YOU would have sat and continued dialogue AFTER 9/11?

But of course you and the other idiot savants WHERE WERE YOU???

 

[Billo_Really]

so I guess Saddam attacking our planes in the no-fly zone was ok, according to you, huh?

We were bombing the holy shit out of him.

Are you saying they didn't have a right to defend themselves?

 

[Billo_Really]

YOU obviously weren't around right after 9/11 were you?
When Iraq cheered the deaths of 3,000 people!
You obviously weren't around when the Anthrax attacks occurred and NO ONE knew whether they were under Saddam's orders or what ! After all he GASSED his own people so why wouldn't he after cheering 9/11 do further terrorists attacks!

BUT OF course IDIOTS like you with your 20/20 hindsight were NO where to tell Americans that:
A) Saddam who after 200 times shooting our planes
B) Invading Kuwait then signing a 1991 Cease fire..
C) That the Anthrax attacks weren't by him...
WHERE WERE YOU THEN?

When these Democrats asking for Bush to do something???
32 democrat quotes indicate even before GWB that Saddam was a threat!

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.

Explain why Clinton said this after bombing Iraq???
In the first three months of 1999, U.S. led-forces bombarded Iraq with 241,000 pounds of bombsjust shy of the 253,000 pounds dropped under President Bush in the eight months leading up to the final UN resolution before the war.
The Raw Story | Clinton bombing of Iraq far exceeded Bush's in run-up to war; Bush 'spikes of activity' questioned
By August of 1999, American and British pilots had fired more than 1,100 missiles against 359 targets that year alone.
THIS WAS ALL DONE BY CLINTON...
So based on Clinton's experience oh and just a little called 9/11
What the f...k would you have done differently!
YOU had Saddam a murderer of 50,000 kurds, who destroyed Mesopotamia displacing 500,000 people his sons using drills on tongues.. and
YOU would have sat and continued dialogue AFTER 9/11?

But of course you and the other idiot savants WHERE WERE YOU???

Why the fuck are you bringing up 9/11?

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

 

[drivebymedia]

Good thread!

The Iraq War is already down in history as the most costly American defeat in U.S. history.

What's more amazing is this thread has not be 'removed' to the Rubber Room by the 'Moderators'!

 

[depotoo]

so I guess Saddam attacking our planes in the no-fly zone was ok, according to you, huh?

We were bombing the holy shit out of him.

Are you saying they didn't have a right to defend themselves?

Please tell me when you are speaking of.

 

[Borillar]

so I guess Saddam attacking our planes in the no-fly zone was ok, according to you, huh?
Iraqi fire at ONW Aircraft
and none of this meant anything either, did it?

ANNEX D - ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

UNSCOM - Report to the Security Council - 25 January 1999
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ANNEX D

ACTIONS BY IRAQ TO OBSTRUCT DISARMAMENT

No coalition aircraft were ever shot down by Iraqi forces. Coalition forces responded to these attacks by taking out Iraqi air defense elements. That is a proportionate response. Full scale invasion is not a proportionate response.

YOU obviously weren't around right after 9/11 were you?
When Iraq cheered the deaths of 3,000 people!
You obviously weren't around when the Anthrax attacks occurred and NO ONE knew whether they were under Saddam's orders or what ! After all he GASSED his own people so why wouldn't he after cheering 9/11 do further terrorists attacks!

BUT OF course IDIOTS like you with your 20/20 hindsight were NO where to tell Americans that:
A) Saddam who after 200 times shooting our planes
B) Invading Kuwait then signing a 1991 Cease fire..
C) That the Anthrax attacks weren't by him...
WHERE WERE YOU THEN?

When these Democrats asking for Bush to do something???
32 democrat quotes indicate even before GWB that Saddam was a threat!

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.

Explain why Clinton said this after bombing Iraq???
In the first three months of 1999, U.S. led-forces bombarded Iraq with 241,000 pounds of bombsjust shy of the 253,000 pounds dropped under President Bush in the eight months leading up to the final UN resolution before the war.
The Raw Story | Clinton bombing of Iraq far exceeded Bush's in run-up to war; Bush 'spikes of activity' questioned
By August of 1999, American and British pilots had fired more than 1,100 missiles against 359 targets that year alone.
THIS WAS ALL DONE BY CLINTON...
So based on Clinton's experience oh and just a little called 9/11
What the f...k would you have done differently!
YOU had Saddam a murderer of 50,000 kurds, who destroyed Mesopotamia displacing 500,000 people his sons using drills on tongues.. and
YOU would have sat and continued dialogue AFTER 9/11?

But of course you and the other idiot savants WHERE WERE YOU???

So you would take the country to war because Saddam was happy that Al Qaeda terrorists highjacked planes and flew them into skyscrapers? And took pot shots at aircraft but missed every time? Because some politicians got Anthrax letters (all of whom were Democrats)? So... no US deaths caused by Saddam. No 9/11 involvement by Saddam. No evidence that the Anthrax came from Saddam. Just a lot of ginned up fear and propaganda.

 

[American Horse]

By STEPHEN F. KNOTT
At 5:34 a.m. on March 20, 2003, American, British and other allied forces invaded Iraq. One of the most divisive conflicts in the nation's history would soon be labeled " Bush's War."

The overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime became official U.S. policy in 1998, when President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act—a bill passed 360-38 by the House of Representatives and by unanimous consent in the Senate. The law called for training and equipping Iraqi dissidents to overthrow Saddam and suggested that the United Nations establish a war-crimes tribunal for the dictator and his lieutenants.

The legislation was partly the result of frustration over the undeclared and relatively unheralded "No-Fly Zone War" that had been waged since 1991. Saddam's military repeatedly fired on U.S. and allied aircraft that were attempting to prevent his regime from destroying Iraqi opposition forces in northern and southern Iraq.

According to former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Hugh Shelton, in 1997 a key member of President Bill Clinton's cabinet (thought by most observers to have been Secretary of State Madeleine Albright) asked Gen. Shelton whether he could arrange for a U.S. aircraft to fly slowly and low enough that it would be shot down, thereby paving the way for an American effort to topple Saddam. Kenneth Pollack, a member of Mr. Clinton's National Security Council staff, would later write in 2002 that it was a question of "not whether but when" the U.S. would invade Iraq. He wrote that the threat presented by Saddam was "no less pressing than those we faced in 1941."

Radicalized by the events of 9/11, George W. Bush gradually concluded that a regime that had used chemical weapons against its own people and poison gas against Iran, invaded Iran and Kuwait, harbored some of the world's most notorious terrorists, made lucrative payments to the families of suicide bombers, fired on American aircraft almost daily, and defied years of U.N. resolutions regarding weapons of mass destruction was a problem. The former chief U.N. weapons inspector, an Australian named Richard Butler, testified in July 2002 that "it is essential to recognize that the claim made by Saddam's representatives, that Iraq has no WMD, is false."

In the U.S., there was a bipartisan consensus that Saddam possessed and continued to develop WMD. Former Vice President Al Gore noted in September 2002 that Saddam had "stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." Then-Sen. Hillary Clinton observed that Saddam hoped to increase his supply of chemical and biological weapons and to "develop nuclear weapons." Then-Sen. John Kerry claimed that "a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his [Saddam's] hands is a real and grave threat to our security."

Even those opposed to using force against Iraq acknowledged that, as then-Sen. Edward Kennedy put it, "we have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing" WMD. When it came time to vote on the authorization for the use of force against Iraq, 81 Democrats in the House voted yes, joined by 29 Democrats in the Senate, including the party's 2004 standard bearers, John Kerry and John Edwards, plus Majority Leader Tom Daschle, Sen. Joe Biden, Mrs. Clinton, and Sens. Harry Reid, Tom Harkin, Chris Dodd and Jay Rockefeller. The latter, a member of the Senate Intelligence Committee, claimed that Saddam would "likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years."

Support for the war extended far beyond Capitol Hill. In March 2003, a Pew Research Center poll indicated that 72% of the American public supported President Bush's decision to use force.

If Mr. Bush "lied," as the common accusation has it, then so did many prominent Democrats—and so did the French, whose foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin, claimed in February 2003 that "regarding the chemical domain, we have evidence of [Iraq's] capacity to produce VX and yperite [mustard gas]; in the biological domain, the evidence suggests the possible possession of significant stocks of anthrax and botulism toxin." Germany's intelligence chief August Hanning noted in March 2002 that "it is our estimate that Iraq will have an atomic bomb in three years."

According to interrogations conducted after the invasion, Saddam's own generals believed that he had WMD and expected him to use these weapons as the invasion force neared Baghdad.

The war in Iraq was authorized by a bipartisan congressional coalition, supported by prominent media voices and backed by the public. Yet on its 10th anniversary Americans will be told of the Bush administration's duplicity in leading us into the conflict. Many members of the bipartisan coalition that committed the U.S. to invade Iraq 10 years ago have long since washed their hands of their share of responsibility.

We owe it to history—and, more important, to all those who died—to recognize that this wasn't Bush's war, it was America's war.

Mr. Knott, a professor of national security affairs at the United States Naval War College, is the author of "Rush to Judgment: George W. Bush, the War on Terror, and His Critics" (University Press of Kansas, 2012).

 

[depotoo]

No coalition aircraft were ever shot down by Iraqi forces. Coalition forces responded to these attacks by taking out Iraqi air defense elements. That is a proportionate response. Full scale invasion is not a proportionate response.

YOU obviously weren't around right after 9/11 were you?
When Iraq cheered the deaths of 3,000 people!
You obviously weren't around when the Anthrax attacks occurred and NO ONE knew whether they were under Saddam's orders or what ! After all he GASSED his own people so why wouldn't he after cheering 9/11 do further terrorists attacks!

BUT OF course IDIOTS like you with your 20/20 hindsight were NO where to tell Americans that:
A) Saddam who after 200 times shooting our planes
B) Invading Kuwait then signing a 1991 Cease fire..
C) That the Anthrax attacks weren't by him...
WHERE WERE YOU THEN?

When these Democrats asking for Bush to do something???
32 democrat quotes indicate even before GWB that Saddam was a threat!

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.

Explain why Clinton said this after bombing Iraq???
In the first three months of 1999, U.S. led-forces bombarded Iraq with 241,000 pounds of bombsjust shy of the 253,000 pounds dropped under President Bush in the eight months leading up to the final UN resolution before the war.
The Raw Story | Clinton bombing of Iraq far exceeded Bush's in run-up to war; Bush 'spikes of activity' questioned
By August of 1999, American and British pilots had fired more than 1,100 missiles against 359 targets that year alone.
THIS WAS ALL DONE BY CLINTON...
So based on Clinton's experience oh and just a little called 9/11
What the f...k would you have done differently!
YOU had Saddam a murderer of 50,000 kurds, who destroyed Mesopotamia displacing 500,000 people his sons using drills on tongues.. and
YOU would have sat and continued dialogue AFTER 9/11?

But of course you and the other idiot savants WHERE WERE YOU???

So you would take the country to war because Saddam was happy that Al Qaeda terrorists highjacked planes and flew them into skyscrapers? And took pot shots at aircraft but missed every time? Because some politicians got Anthrax letters (all of whom were Democrats)? So... no US deaths caused by Saddam. No 9/11 involvement by Saddam. No evidence that the Anthrax came from Saddam. Just a lot of ginned up fear and propaganda.

still no comment on my second link...

 

[ScienceRocks]

For what? I'm starting to agree with that as we didn't get shit from it.

We could of mined a asteroid and benefited.
We could of put it into advancing science.
We could of put it into our childrens education.

 

[healthmyths]

YOU obviously weren't around right after 9/11 were you?
When Iraq cheered the deaths of 3,000 people!
You obviously weren't around when the Anthrax attacks occurred and NO ONE knew whether they were under Saddam's orders or what ! After all he GASSED his own people so why wouldn't he after cheering 9/11 do further terrorists attacks!

BUT OF course IDIOTS like you with your 20/20 hindsight were NO where to tell Americans that:
A) Saddam who after 200 times shooting our planes
B) Invading Kuwait then signing a 1991 Cease fire..
C) That the Anthrax attacks weren't by him...
WHERE WERE YOU THEN?

When these Democrats asking for Bush to do something???
32 democrat quotes indicate even before GWB that Saddam was a threat!

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.

Explain why Clinton said this after bombing Iraq???
In the first three months of 1999, U.S. led-forces bombarded Iraq with 241,000 pounds of bombsjust shy of the 253,000 pounds dropped under President Bush in the eight months leading up to the final UN resolution before the war.
The Raw Story | Clinton bombing of Iraq far exceeded Bush's in run-up to war; Bush 'spikes of activity' questioned
By August of 1999, American and British pilots had fired more than 1,100 missiles against 359 targets that year alone.
THIS WAS ALL DONE BY CLINTON...
So based on Clinton's experience oh and just a little called 9/11
What the f...k would you have done differently!
YOU had Saddam a murderer of 50,000 kurds, who destroyed Mesopotamia displacing 500,000 people his sons using drills on tongues.. and
YOU would have sat and continued dialogue AFTER 9/11?

But of course you and the other idiot savants WHERE WERE YOU???

Why the fuck are you bringing up 9/11?

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

OH so you were one of those idiot savants THAT KNEW that but wouldn't open your mouth when 90% of americans were happy that we were taking Saddam out?

You mean YOU KNEW all along what John Kerry didn't when he said:"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
Where were you then? Idiot savants are very knowledgeable/skilled in one thing and I guess that is what YOU WERE skilled to know what Kerry and by the way
HILLARY didn't know when she said: "He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002

WHY didn't you tell everyone that after all you are the resident IDiOT Savant when it comes obviously to Iraq!
I mean YOU knew all along but why didn't you say something... were you Chickens...it???

 

[wihosa]

The Iraq war was a war of choice. The justifications given at the time turned out to be fabricated. The fact is we (the US) was the aggressor in an illegal invasion and occupation of a sovereign state. This is a stain on our moral standing for which Americans are only starting to come to grips with. All the fools on the right and the left who went along with the Bush liars have much to atone for.

 

[healthmyths]

Our current SoS said..
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003

So you idiot savants THAT KNEW Saddam was not a threat as Kerry said... how in your military experience would you "disarm" Saddam as Kerry clearly stated?
Why didn't you stand up at the time and say "Saddam is no threat... I know because well his foreign minister said so!"

On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers.
Suskind reports that the head of Iraqi intelligence, Tahir Jalil Habbush, met secretly with British intelligence in Jordan in the early days of 2003.
In weekly meetings with Michael Shipster, the British director of Iraqi operations,
Habbush conveyed that Iraq had no active nuclear, chemical or biological weapons programs and no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction."
Author: Bush knew Iraq had no WMD - TODAY News - TODAY.com

AND of course this Head of Intelligence WOULD NEVER LIE!!!

 

[healthmyths]

The Iraq war was a war of choice. The justifications given at the time turned out to be fabricated. The fact is we (the US) was the aggressor in an illegal invasion and occupation of a sovereign state. This is a stain on our moral standing for which Americans are only starting to come to grips with. All the fools on the right and the left who went along with the Bush liars have much to atone for.

SO you are so f...king smart WHY didn't you STAND UP to the below people before BUSH was president and tell them THEY WERE BEING LIED TO BY CLINTON's
intelligence agencies???
WHY was it OK for Clinton to bomb the shit out of Iraq but Bush finally having enough bulls..t from Saddam removed him!
I mean this is ONE of the reasons Korea flying missiles, Iran "ONE YEAR AWAY from Nuclear"... is dictators and dicks don't believe Obama!
They saw how the MSM as THEIR ALLY destroyed Americans confidence in the President/military!
They saw how traitors words like "air raiding villages, killing civilians, "US troops are terrorists".. "Nazis"... why would they believe anything out of any American's mouth!

"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger Clinton Ntl. Secur. Advr 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"..give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction .... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.