Obama needs to be tried for war crimes

[WethePeopleUS]

You're a sad little child. You come here claiming that you're neither conservative or liberal in the hopes of classifying yourself as the king of objectivity. And then you tow the liberal line. You think we don't see that shell game all the time on here? You're garbage.

No, you are a sad misguided fool who thinks I am some disguised liberal because I throw out some info that might be contrary to Bush. Because I do believe all of my posts have been about Bush, and his administration and not the republican party. And someone like you calling me garbage, make me laugh and feel good. Because if people are not hating you, you aren't doing something right.

Your standards for self evaluation are as faulty as your logic.

Coming from you, that means a lot

 

[Freewill]

1. I'll name call all I want within our so-called intelligent conversation. It doesn't speak to ignorance, other than yours.
2. Your so-called facts are nothing but shallow libtard talking points.
3. Our government is becoming our biggest problem more and more everyday. But listening to you cry about Iraq being illegal is nonsense. It was legally activated and legally conducted. And you can drone on about what lies you think there are; but they're hardly facts and I guarantee you that the government right now is lying their asses off about all types of war articles. So your Bush is illegal and Obama is legal garbage is moral relativism at its finest.
4. I'm not blinded by hate of liberals. But am I tired of their phony arguments? YOU BETCHA.

I guess this quote never had truer meaning when it comes to you:

"Don't argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience"

I am providing facts, yes that right, facts, from a variety of sources of non-US government origin, yet you chalk them up to "libtard talking points" so ummm yea, your ignorance has worn me out I'm done you win haha

Yes you use them, here is one of your other posts
No it is not. Obama has not executed the same wars as Bush. How could you say that? What sovereign nation did Obama invade based on lies? I think the reason that people were/are calling for Bush's head is because he based an entire war on a lie. Iraq did not have WMDs. Iraq had no ties to Al-Qaeda, and were not funding them, and letting them use Iraq to train fighters. Iraq was not seeking to make nuclear weapons either. So sense all of Bush's reasons for going to war were illegitimate, that subsequently made his invasion illegitimate. And since his illegitimate war caused hundreds of thousands of innocent lives, people wanted/want his head.

I personally feel he (Bush) should have to face consequences of his actions. He lied to the entire world, to start a war with a sovereign nation, which costs thousands of lives, and billions of dollars. And he just gets to walk away like a smooth criminal, after he and all his Halliburton buddies got rich from the "reconstruction" projects in Iraq. That is fuckin bullshit if you ask me. And it has not a goddamn thing to do with him being a republican, and everything to do with him being a piece of shit.


That is horseshit......you know it and I know it....Did you say the same thing on Clinton for firing missles and killing people in Iraq? Or is it not the principal but the degree?

And as for lies....EVERYONE thought he had them.....not just Bush, so quit being a dumbfuck about it...yes that IS A talking point....Haliburton...talking point....so yeah you use tons of talking points....and are dumb as a rock.
Why didnt Obama leave then?
AQ was in Iraq, not supported by them, but they were there and so was Hussein, time to knock out two birds with one stone....and I'm glad they were fighting over there and not blowing shit up over here

I live to smoke out tools like you that say their independant, when it's really easy to findout otherwise.

How do you know he lied instead of just messing up big time thinking that the CIA told him and Bill Clinton was true? Where do you get your evidence? Have you ever been wrong? Is the world a better place without aholes like Saddam and his sons? Sure I would have voted no for war but congress had access to all the evidence and they decided it was a good idea. Or are you saying that those who voted yes did so just because they wanted to please Bush or that they did it for political reasons? If either of those are true then it is at them you should be venting. Bush followed protocol in going to war, Clinton and Obama did not. A MAJORITY AT THE TIME thought Saddam a threat with WMD and he did except not in the quantities that will make people stop with the lying BS..

 

[poet]

I guess this quote never had truer meaning when it comes to you:

"Don't argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience"

I am providing facts, yes that right, facts, from a variety of sources of non-US government origin, yet you chalk them up to "libtard talking points" so ummm yea, your ignorance has worn me out I'm done you win haha

Yes you use them, here is one of your other posts
No it is not. Obama has not executed the same wars as Bush. How could you say that? What sovereign nation did Obama invade based on lies? I think the reason that people were/are calling for Bush's head is because he based an entire war on a lie. Iraq did not have WMDs. Iraq had no ties to Al-Qaeda, and were not funding them, and letting them use Iraq to train fighters. Iraq was not seeking to make nuclear weapons either. So sense all of Bush's reasons for going to war were illegitimate, that subsequently made his invasion illegitimate. And since his illegitimate war caused hundreds of thousands of innocent lives, people wanted/want his head.

I personally feel he (Bush) should have to face consequences of his actions. He lied to the entire world, to start a war with a sovereign nation, which costs thousands of lives, and billions of dollars. And he just gets to walk away like a smooth criminal, after he and all his Halliburton buddies got rich from the "reconstruction" projects in Iraq. That is fuckin bullshit if you ask me. And it has not a goddamn thing to do with him being a republican, and everything to do with him being a piece of shit.


That is horseshit......you know it and I know it....Did you say the same thing on Clinton for firing missles and killing people in Iraq? Or is it not the principal but the degree?

And as for lies....EVERYONE thought he had them.....not just Bush, so quit being a dumbfuck about it...yes that IS A talking point....Haliburton...talking point....so yeah you use tons of talking points....and are dumb as a rock.
Why didnt Obama leave then?
AQ was in Iraq, not supported by them, but they were there and so was Hussein, time to knock out two birds with one stone....and I'm glad they were fighting over there and not blowing shit up over here

I live to smoke out tools like you that say their independant, when it's really easy to findout otherwise.

How do you know he lied instead of just messing up big time thinking that the CIA told him and Bill Clinton was true? Where do you get your evidence? Have you ever been wrong? Is the world a better place without aholes like Saddam and his sons? Sure I would have voted no for war but congress had access to all the evidence and they decided it was a good idea. Or are you saying that those who voted yes did so just because they wanted to please Bush or that they did it for political reasons? If either of those are true then it is at them you should be venting. Bush followed protocol in going to war, Clinton and Obama did not. A MAJORITY AT THE TIME thought Saddam a threat with WMD and he did except not in the quantities that will make people stop with the lying BS..

Bottom line. Bush lied, in a SOTU speech about Saddam having WMD, whether based on faulty intel or his mad rush to become a wartime president, in an effort to "best" his father, the reasons for which are irrelevant. And when Joe Wilson sought to expose the lie, his wife, Valerie Plame was outed as a CIA operative, to punish him for his Op-Ed., at the behest of the Dick Cheney, who later projected that we would be touted as liberators, and rose petals would be thrown at our feet, greeted by the Iraqi people. This was an unnecessary war, against a despot, who was being contained with U.N. sanctions, and who was not responsible for 9/11, but was an easy scapegoat to accomplish what the Bush administration saw as their legacy. Bush followed no protocol, and even ordered the U.N. inspectors out, preemptively, to facilitate his "rush to war"....at the cost of how many lives on both sides? Leaving behind the biggest mess for President Obama to clean up, and having us beholden to China for loans to finance the most costly and unnecessary war in U.S. History. The entire Bush Administration should be tried for crimes against humanity, and treason.

 

[billyerock1991]

BWA HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH thats funny

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Yes you use them, here is one of your other posts
No it is not. Obama has not executed the same wars as Bush. How could you say that? What sovereign nation did Obama invade based on lies? I think the reason that people were/are calling for Bush's head is because he based an entire war on a lie. Iraq did not have WMDs. Iraq had no ties to Al-Qaeda, and were not funding them, and letting them use Iraq to train fighters. Iraq was not seeking to make nuclear weapons either. So sense all of Bush's reasons for going to war were illegitimate, that subsequently made his invasion illegitimate. And since his illegitimate war caused hundreds of thousands of innocent lives, people wanted/want his head.

I personally feel he (Bush) should have to face consequences of his actions. He lied to the entire world, to start a war with a sovereign nation, which costs thousands of lives, and billions of dollars. And he just gets to walk away like a smooth criminal, after he and all his Halliburton buddies got rich from the "reconstruction" projects in Iraq. That is fuckin bullshit if you ask me. And it has not a goddamn thing to do with him being a republican, and everything to do with him being a piece of shit.


That is horseshit......you know it and I know it....Did you say the same thing on Clinton for firing missles and killing people in Iraq? Or is it not the principal but the degree?

And as for lies....EVERYONE thought he had them.....not just Bush, so quit being a dumbfuck about it...yes that IS A talking point....Haliburton...talking point....so yeah you use tons of talking points....and are dumb as a rock.
Why didnt Obama leave then?
AQ was in Iraq, not supported by them, but they were there and so was Hussein, time to knock out two birds with one stone....and I'm glad they were fighting over there and not blowing shit up over here

I live to smoke out tools like you that say their independant, when it's really easy to findout otherwise.

How do you know he lied instead of just messing up big time thinking that the CIA told him and Bill Clinton was true? Where do you get your evidence? Have you ever been wrong? Is the world a better place without aholes like Saddam and his sons? Sure I would have voted no for war but congress had access to all the evidence and they decided it was a good idea. Or are you saying that those who voted yes did so just because they wanted to please Bush or that they did it for political reasons? If either of those are true then it is at them you should be venting. Bush followed protocol in going to war, Clinton and Obama did not. A MAJORITY AT THE TIME thought Saddam a threat with WMD and he did except not in the quantities that will make people stop with the lying BS..

Bottom line. Bush lied, in a SOTU speech about Saddam having WMD, whether based on faulty intel or his mad rush to become a wartime president, in an effort to "best" his father, the reasons for which are irrelevant. And when Joe Wilson sought to expose the lie, his wife, Valerie Plame was outed as a CIA operative, to punish him for his Op-Ed., at the behest of the Dick Cheney, who later projected that we would be touted as liberators, and rose petals would be thrown at our feet, greeted by the Iraqi people. This was an unnecessary war, against a despot, who was being contained with U.N. sanctions, and who was not responsible for 9/11, but was an easy scapegoat to accomplish what the Bush administration saw as their legacy. Bush followed no protocol, and even ordered the U.N. inspectors out, preemptively, to facilitate his "rush to war"....at the cost of how many lives on both sides? Leaving behind the biggest mess for President Obama to clean up, and having us beholden to China for loans to finance the most costly and unnecessary war in U.S. History. The entire Bush Administration should be tried for crimes against humanity, and treason.

See, this is the irrational vitriol / self righteous indignation of liberals I was talking about. They call for Bush's head while Obama is allowed to do whatever he wants. Thanks Poet for volunteering to play the stooge.

 

[poet]

How do you know he lied instead of just messing up big time thinking that the CIA told him and Bill Clinton was true? Where do you get your evidence? Have you ever been wrong? Is the world a better place without aholes like Saddam and his sons? Sure I would have voted no for war but congress had access to all the evidence and they decided it was a good idea. Or are you saying that those who voted yes did so just because they wanted to please Bush or that they did it for political reasons? If either of those are true then it is at them you should be venting. Bush followed protocol in going to war, Clinton and Obama did not. A MAJORITY AT THE TIME thought Saddam a threat with WMD and he did except not in the quantities that will make people stop with the lying BS..

Bottom line. Bush lied, in a SOTU speech about Saddam having WMD, whether based on faulty intel or his mad rush to become a wartime president, in an effort to "best" his father, the reasons for which are irrelevant. And when Joe Wilson sought to expose the lie, his wife, Valerie Plame was outed as a CIA operative, to punish him for his Op-Ed., at the behest of the Dick Cheney, who later projected that we would be touted as liberators, and rose petals would be thrown at our feet, greeted by the Iraqi people. This was an unnecessary war, against a despot, who was being contained with U.N. sanctions, and who was not responsible for 9/11, but was an easy scapegoat to accomplish what the Bush administration saw as their legacy. Bush followed no protocol, and even ordered the U.N. inspectors out, preemptively, to facilitate his "rush to war"....at the cost of how many lives on both sides? Leaving behind the biggest mess for President Obama to clean up, and having us beholden to China for loans to finance the most costly and unnecessary war in U.S. History. The entire Bush Administration should be tried for crimes against humanity, and treason.

See, this is the irrational vitriol / self righteous indignation of liberals I was talking about. They call for Bush's head while Obama is allowed to do whatever he wants. Thanks Poet for volunteering to play the stooge.

Oh, you're welcome. Glad that I could accommodate. Not that it smacks of irrational vitriol or self righteous indignation by a long shot, but rather of truth. What the fuck does what President Obama is doing presently, have any bearing on what President Bush did? Nothing. Nada. Zilch.
Nothing more than the right's "sour grapes" for blowing November's election, by backing a flawed candidate with no real chance of re-taking the White House, and worse, being flabbergasted when he lost in an electoral landslide. What you should do is refute my post, with documentation.

 

[WethePeopleUS]

Bottom line. Bush lied, in a SOTU speech about Saddam having WMD, whether based on faulty intel or his mad rush to become a wartime president, in an effort to "best" his father, the reasons for which are irrelevant. And when Joe Wilson sought to expose the lie, his wife, Valerie Plame was outed as a CIA operative, to punish him for his Op-Ed., at the behest of the Dick Cheney, who later projected that we would be touted as liberators, and rose petals would be thrown at our feet, greeted by the Iraqi people. This was an unnecessary war, against a despot, who was being contained with U.N. sanctions, and who was not responsible for 9/11, but was an easy scapegoat to accomplish what the Bush administration saw as their legacy. Bush followed no protocol, and even ordered the U.N. inspectors out, preemptively, to facilitate his "rush to war"....at the cost of how many lives on both sides? Leaving behind the biggest mess for President Obama to clean up, and having us beholden to China for loans to finance the most costly and unnecessary war in U.S. History. The entire Bush Administration should be tried for crimes against humanity, and treason.

See, this is the irrational vitriol / self righteous indignation of liberals I was talking about. They call for Bush's head while Obama is allowed to do whatever he wants. Thanks Poet for volunteering to play the stooge.

Oh, you're welcome. Glad that I could accommodate. Not that it smacks of irrational vitriol or self righteous indignation by a long shot, but rather of truth. What the fuck does what President Obama is doing presently, have any bearing on what President Bush did? Nothing. Nada. Zilch.
Nothing more than the right's "sour grapes" for blowing November's election, by backing a flawed candidate with no real chance of re-taking the White House, and worse, being flabbergasted when he lost in an electoral landslide. What you should do is refute my post, with documentation.

Poet these fuckin idiots are not going to back one statement they make, simply because they can't. While we can offer up tons of info on how the POS Bush DID lie, they can just sit here and call us liberal boot-licking whores. They have no real intelligence, so arguing with them is a waste of time, TRUST me.

 

[Freewill]

Yes you use them, here is one of your other posts
No it is not. Obama has not executed the same wars as Bush. How could you say that? What sovereign nation did Obama invade based on lies? I think the reason that people were/are calling for Bush's head is because he based an entire war on a lie. Iraq did not have WMDs. Iraq had no ties to Al-Qaeda, and were not funding them, and letting them use Iraq to train fighters. Iraq was not seeking to make nuclear weapons either. So sense all of Bush's reasons for going to war were illegitimate, that subsequently made his invasion illegitimate. And since his illegitimate war caused hundreds of thousands of innocent lives, people wanted/want his head.

I personally feel he (Bush) should have to face consequences of his actions. He lied to the entire world, to start a war with a sovereign nation, which costs thousands of lives, and billions of dollars. And he just gets to walk away like a smooth criminal, after he and all his Halliburton buddies got rich from the "reconstruction" projects in Iraq. That is fuckin bullshit if you ask me. And it has not a goddamn thing to do with him being a republican, and everything to do with him being a piece of shit.


That is horseshit......you know it and I know it....Did you say the same thing on Clinton for firing missles and killing people in Iraq? Or is it not the principal but the degree?

And as for lies....EVERYONE thought he had them.....not just Bush, so quit being a dumbfuck about it...yes that IS A talking point....Haliburton...talking point....so yeah you use tons of talking points....and are dumb as a rock.
Why didnt Obama leave then?
AQ was in Iraq, not supported by them, but they were there and so was Hussein, time to knock out two birds with one stone....and I'm glad they were fighting over there and not blowing shit up over here

I live to smoke out tools like you that say their independant, when it's really easy to findout otherwise.

How do you know he lied instead of just messing up big time thinking that the CIA told him and Bill Clinton was true? Where do you get your evidence? Have you ever been wrong? Is the world a better place without aholes like Saddam and his sons? Sure I would have voted no for war but congress had access to all the evidence and they decided it was a good idea. Or are you saying that those who voted yes did so just because they wanted to please Bush or that they did it for political reasons? If either of those are true then it is at them you should be venting. Bush followed protocol in going to war, Clinton and Obama did not. A MAJORITY AT THE TIME thought Saddam a threat with WMD and he did except not in the quantities that will make people stop with the lying BS..

Bottom line. Bush lied, in a SOTU speech about Saddam having WMD, whether based on faulty intel or his mad rush to become a wartime president, in an effort to "best" his father, the reasons for which are irrelevant. And when Joe Wilson sought to expose the lie, his wife, Valerie Plame was outed as a CIA operative, to punish him for his Op-Ed., at the behest of the Dick Cheney, who later projected that we would be touted as liberators, and rose petals would be thrown at our feet, greeted by the Iraqi people. This was an unnecessary war, against a despot, who was being contained with U.N. sanctions, and who was not responsible for 9/11, but was an easy scapegoat to accomplish what the Bush administration saw as their legacy. Bush followed no protocol, and even ordered the U.N. inspectors out, preemptively, to facilitate his "rush to war"....at the cost of how many lives on both sides? Leaving behind the biggest mess for President Obama to clean up, and having us beholden to China for loans to finance the most costly and unnecessary war in U.S. History. The entire Bush Administration should be tried for crimes against humanity, and treason.

Oh gosh it is interesting to see history rewritten before ones own eyes. You need do some research on who exposed Plame.

The Iraq Resolution or the Iraq War Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002,[1] Pub.L. 107–243, 116 Stat. 1498, enacted October 16, 2002, H.J.Res. 114) is a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing military action against Iraq.

Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You may not like what Bush did, and neither do I, but that does not give you or me the right to make up the facts as we see fit. Bush put the resolution before congress with access to the evidence made available to all. THAT is the facts. A bipartisan majority voted in the affirmative, including Hillary and John Kerry. That too is fact.

You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree to it, but that does not give you the right to make up the facts.

 

[Freewill]

See, this is the irrational vitriol / self righteous indignation of liberals I was talking about. They call for Bush's head while Obama is allowed to do whatever he wants. Thanks Poet for volunteering to play the stooge.

Oh, you're welcome. Glad that I could accommodate. Not that it smacks of irrational vitriol or self righteous indignation by a long shot, but rather of truth. What the fuck does what President Obama is doing presently, have any bearing on what President Bush did? Nothing. Nada. Zilch.
Nothing more than the right's "sour grapes" for blowing November's election, by backing a flawed candidate with no real chance of re-taking the White House, and worse, being flabbergasted when he lost in an electoral landslide. What you should do is refute my post, with documentation.

Poet these fuckin idiots are not going to back one statement they make, simply because they can't. While we can offer up tons of info on how the POS Bush DID lie, they can just sit here and call us liberal boot-licking whores. They have no real intelligence, so arguing with them is a waste of time, TRUST me.

You have present NO info on how Bush lied. You have been exposed to the truth yet you ignore the truth. YOU and Poet do exactly as you claim of others, it is projection.

Now show us where GWB lied and admitted to the same. Because if you just keep rehashing the same old BS then it must be pointed out to you that many members of congress, who had access and knowledge of the same evidence, voted for war. Hillary and Kerry both did. Are they too liars?

 

[WethePeopleUS]

Oh, you're welcome. Glad that I could accommodate. Not that it smacks of irrational vitriol or self righteous indignation by a long shot, but rather of truth. What the fuck does what President Obama is doing presently, have any bearing on what President Bush did? Nothing. Nada. Zilch.
Nothing more than the right's "sour grapes" for blowing November's election, by backing a flawed candidate with no real chance of re-taking the White House, and worse, being flabbergasted when he lost in an electoral landslide. What you should do is refute my post, with documentation.

Poet these fuckin idiots are not going to back one statement they make, simply because they can't. While we can offer up tons of info on how the POS Bush DID lie, they can just sit here and call us liberal boot-licking whores. They have no real intelligence, so arguing with them is a waste of time, TRUST me.

You have present NO info on how Bush lied. You have been exposed to the truth yet you ignore the truth. YOU and Poet do exactly as you claim of others, it is projection.

Now show us where GWB lied and admitted to the same. Because if you just keep rehashing the same old BS then it must be pointed out to you that many members of congress, who had access and knowledge of the same evidence, voted for war. Hillary and Kerry both did. Are they too liars?

Read previous posts, and umm do a little research yourself. I refuse to do all of the work for you idiots. All of the info is out there, just climb out of your narrow view of reality, and look, with unbiased eyes. Perhaps then your brain will allow actual knowledge to seep in. And seriously dude, how dumb are? Maybe I can put it in layman's terms for ya. Yea I know an overwhelming majority voted to go to war with Iraq, everyone knows that. Here is a parallel scenario. I held a chunk of "gold" in front of you, and told you it was gold. I told you it had the same weight as gold, the same color as gold, so it must be gold. No, it is actually compressed aluminum and painted a gold color. Can you understand what I'm doing, or does this escape your comprehension level?

 

[poet]

How do you know he lied instead of just messing up big time thinking that the CIA told him and Bill Clinton was true? Where do you get your evidence? Have you ever been wrong? Is the world a better place without aholes like Saddam and his sons? Sure I would have voted no for war but congress had access to all the evidence and they decided it was a good idea. Or are you saying that those who voted yes did so just because they wanted to please Bush or that they did it for political reasons? If either of those are true then it is at them you should be venting. Bush followed protocol in going to war, Clinton and Obama did not. A MAJORITY AT THE TIME thought Saddam a threat with WMD and he did except not in the quantities that will make people stop with the lying BS..

Bottom line. Bush lied, in a SOTU speech about Saddam having WMD, whether based on faulty intel or his mad rush to become a wartime president, in an effort to "best" his father, the reasons for which are irrelevant. And when Joe Wilson sought to expose the lie, his wife, Valerie Plame was outed as a CIA operative, to punish him for his Op-Ed., at the behest of the Dick Cheney, who later projected that we would be touted as liberators, and rose petals would be thrown at our feet, greeted by the Iraqi people. This was an unnecessary war, against a despot, who was being contained with U.N. sanctions, and who was not responsible for 9/11, but was an easy scapegoat to accomplish what the Bush administration saw as their legacy. Bush followed no protocol, and even ordered the U.N. inspectors out, preemptively, to facilitate his "rush to war"....at the cost of how many lives on both sides? Leaving behind the biggest mess for President Obama to clean up, and having us beholden to China for loans to finance the most costly and unnecessary war in U.S. History. The entire Bush Administration should be tried for crimes against humanity, and treason.

Oh gosh it is interesting to see history rewritten before ones own eyes. You need do some research on who exposed Plame.

The Iraq Resolution or the Iraq War Resolution (formally the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002,[1] Pub.L. 107–243, 116 Stat. 1498, enacted October 16, 2002, H.J.Res. 114) is a joint resolution passed by the United States Congress in October 2002 as Public Law No: 107-243, authorizing military action against Iraq.

Iraq Resolution - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You may not like what Bush did, and neither do I, but that does not give you or me the right to make up the facts as we see fit. Bush put the resolution before congress with access to the evidence made available to all. THAT is the facts. A bipartisan majority voted in the affirmative, including Hillary and John Kerry. That too is fact.

You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree to it, but that does not give you the right to make up the facts.

The Nation: Did Bush Deceive Us in His Rush to War?

George Bush's 20 worst moments - Telegraph

Top 10 Bush Administration Mistakes and Screw-ups

Mistakes, Excuses and Painful Lessons From the Iraq War - Bloomberg

These are the facts. Not made up. President Obama, in fact, spoke out against the war, before he declared himself a candidate for the presidency. Hello? Try not to embarrass yourself, any further. M'kay?

 

[WethePeopleUS]

1. I'll name call all I want within our so-called intelligent conversation. It doesn't speak to ignorance, other than yours.
2. Your so-called facts are nothing but shallow libtard talking points.
3. Our government is becoming our biggest problem more and more everyday. But listening to you cry about Iraq being illegal is nonsense. It was legally activated and legally conducted. And you can drone on about what lies you think there are; but they're hardly facts and I guarantee you that the government right now is lying their asses off about all types of war articles. So your Bush is illegal and Obama is legal garbage is moral relativism at its finest.
4. I'm not blinded by hate of liberals. But am I tired of their phony arguments? YOU BETCHA.

I guess this quote never had truer meaning when it comes to you:

"Don't argue with idiots because they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience"

I am providing facts, yes that right, facts, from a variety of sources of non-US government origin, yet you chalk them up to "libtard talking points" so ummm yea, your ignorance has worn me out I'm done you win haha

Yes you use them, here is one of your other posts
No it is not. Obama has not executed the same wars as Bush. How could you say that? What sovereign nation did Obama invade based on lies? I think the reason that people were/are calling for Bush's head is because he based an entire war on a lie. Iraq did not have WMDs. Iraq had no ties to Al-Qaeda, and were not funding them, and letting them use Iraq to train fighters. Iraq was not seeking to make nuclear weapons either. So sense all of Bush's reasons for going to war were illegitimate, that subsequently made his invasion illegitimate. And since his illegitimate war caused hundreds of thousands of innocent lives, people wanted/want his head.

I personally feel he (Bush) should have to face consequences of his actions. He lied to the entire world, to start a war with a sovereign nation, which costs thousands of lives, and billions of dollars. And he just gets to walk away like a smooth criminal, after he and all his Halliburton buddies got rich from the "reconstruction" projects in Iraq. That is fuckin bullshit if you ask me. And it has not a goddamn thing to do with him being a republican, and everything to do with him being a piece of shit.


That is horseshit......you know it and I know it....Did you say the same thing on Clinton for firing missles and killing people in Iraq? Or is it not the principal but the degree?

And as for lies....EVERYONE thought he had them.....not just Bush, so quit being a dumbfuck about it...yes that IS A talking point....Haliburton...talking point....so yeah you use tons of talking points....and are dumb as a rock.
Why didnt Obama leave then?
AQ was in Iraq, not supported by them, but they were there and so was Hussein, time to knock out two birds with one stone....and I'm glad they were fighting over there and not blowing shit up over here

I live to smoke out tools like you that say their independant, when it's really easy to findout otherwise.

And I bet this piece of shit isn't going to answer me, so I'll ask it one more time to see what kind of person you are. Since you are all for going over to the middle east and invading nations, HAVE YOU SIGNED UP TO SERVE? I want to know if the person sooo willing to go fight, has actually signed up for the cause that they so honestly believe in? My guess is no, but I would loved to be proven wrong.

 

[Pogo]

Yes it does. Moral? Obviously, a different matter. But we elect our officials to make legal decisions and that includes war. I'm sorry, but you can cry that a legal war is illegal all you want but that makes you a stooge and somebody who is towing the liberal drip.

No, it doesn't. "Legal" only in the domain of the US Congress. War, however, tends to involve other nations.

Besides, Congress never declared war on Iraq. I've been unable to find the article in the Constitution that gives Congress the power of a "thumbs up".

This really is not all that deep...

Article 1, Section 8 dick wad

A declaration of war is a formal declaration issued by a national government indicating that a state of war exists between that nation and another. For the United States, Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution says "Congress shall have power to ... declare War"

-- and still nothing there about "thumbs up", smegma mouth.

 

[Pogo]

Cry me a river, ass wipe. Saddam was a brutal murdering dictator and terrorist say all types of shit after they're released.

What in the blue fuck does that sentence mean?

How much have you drank? That sentence is clear dude. For fuck's sake.

Who is the "terrorist" who "say" [sic] all types of shit? And whoever he is, what the fuck does he have to do with Saddam?

"How much have you drank"? "towing the liberal drip"? Is English your third language?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

No, it doesn't. "Legal" only in the domain of the US Congress. War, however, tends to involve other nations.

Besides, Congress never declared war on Iraq. I've been unable to find the article in the Constitution that gives Congress the power of a "thumbs up".

This really is not all that deep...

Article 1, Section 8 dick wad

A declaration of war is a formal declaration issued by a national government indicating that a state of war exists between that nation and another. For the United States, Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution says "Congress shall have power to ... declare War"

-- and still nothing there about "thumbs up", smegma mouth.

It really doesn’t matter what action Congress took, the war was illegal from the outset, as Bush himself admitted, along with other administration officials, that there were no WMDs, Saddam was not involved in 9/11, and he posed no threat to his people or neighbors, as the NFZ was working perfectly.

Because members of Congress were predicating their votes on the lies of the Bush Administration, their votes would not make legitimate the illegitimate claims of that administration, rendering the invasion of Iraq indeed illegal.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

See, this is the irrational vitriol / self righteous indignation of liberals I was talking about. They call for Bush's head while Obama is allowed to do whatever he wants. Thanks Poet for volunteering to play the stooge.

Oh, you're welcome. Glad that I could accommodate. Not that it smacks of irrational vitriol or self righteous indignation by a long shot, but rather of truth. What the fuck does what President Obama is doing presently, have any bearing on what President Bush did? Nothing. Nada. Zilch.
Nothing more than the right's "sour grapes" for blowing November's election, by backing a flawed candidate with no real chance of re-taking the White House, and worse, being flabbergasted when he lost in an electoral landslide. What you should do is refute my post, with documentation.

Poet these fuckin idiots are not going to back one statement they make, simply because they can't. While we can offer up tons of info on how the POS Bush DID lie, they can just sit here and call us liberal boot-licking whores. They have no real intelligence, so arguing with them is a waste of time, TRUST me.

"Resulting to name calling, while I'm trying to have an intelligent conversation with you, shows your ignorance."

Yup, you're a liberal alright. Talking out of both sides of your mouth.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

No, it doesn't. "Legal" only in the domain of the US Congress. War, however, tends to involve other nations.

Besides, Congress never declared war on Iraq. I've been unable to find the article in the Constitution that gives Congress the power of a "thumbs up".

This really is not all that deep...

Article 1, Section 8 dick wad

A declaration of war is a formal declaration issued by a national government indicating that a state of war exists between that nation and another. For the United States, Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution says "Congress shall have power to ... declare War"

-- and still nothing there about "thumbs up", smegma mouth.

Oh. So, you were making a semantic point that meant nothing and stifled conversation. My bad. I'll let you get back to your idiocy.

 

[Pogo]

Yes it does. Moral? Obviously, a different matter. But we elect our officials to make legal decisions and that includes war. I'm sorry, but you can cry that a legal war is illegal all you want but that makes you a stooge and somebody who is towing the liberal drip.

No, it doesn't. "Legal" only in the domain of the US Congress. War, however, tends to involve other nations.

Besides, Congress never declared war on Iraq. I've been unable to find the article in the Constitution that gives Congress the power of a "thumbs up".

This really is not all that deep...

Article 1, Section 8 dick wad

A declaration of war is a formal declaration issued by a national government indicating that a state of war exists between that nation and another. For the United States, Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution says "Congress shall have power to ... declare War"

-- and still nothing there about "thumbs up", smegma mouth.

Oh. So, you were making a semantic point that meant nothing and stifled conversation. My bad. I'll let you get back to your idiocy.

Those who can't read, blame it on those who can.

No Great Git, I was making a refutation that sailed over your head. Congress never declared war on Iraq, which is all your quoted article mentions.

I mean, DUH.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

Article 1, Section 8 dick wad

-- and still nothing there about "thumbs up", smegma mouth.

Oh. So, you were making a semantic point that meant nothing and stifled conversation. My bad. I'll let you get back to your idiocy.

Those who can't read, blame it on those who can.

No Great Git, I was making a refutation that sailed over your head. Congress never declared war on Iraq, which is all your quoted article mentions.

I mean, DUH.

The House passed a use of the military force resolution on Oct 10, 2002. The Senate pass a war resolution on Oct 11, 2002. Bush signed it on Oct 16, 2002. Some would argue that it wasn't an act of war? But that's people like you who are playing semantics. Because otherwise Vietnam, Korea, the gulf war, etc would not be considered wars too. Anyways, this is just another pointless argument brought to us by you.

 

[Pogo]

-- and still nothing there about "thumbs up", smegma mouth.

Oh. So, you were making a semantic point that meant nothing and stifled conversation. My bad. I'll let you get back to your idiocy.

Those who can't read, blame it on those who can.

No Great Git, I was making a refutation that sailed over your head. Congress never declared war on Iraq, which is all your quoted article mentions.

I mean, DUH.

The House passed a use of the military force resolution on Oct 10, 2002. The Senate pass a war resolution on Oct 11, 2002. Bush signed it on Oct 16, 2002.

And that was not a declaration of war.

This country has not declared war since 1941. Maybe you should come back when you start to understand this grownup stuff.