Question: why do liberals always say Bush started TWO unwarranted wars?

[CrusaderFrank]

I wonder what the purple fingered lady has to say about Obama and the American Left switching sides in the GWOT

Sent from my XT1080 using Tapatalk

 

[Wildman]

Then deny they are truthers? Real simple questions really. I mean how many times do we see them blame Bush for starting TWO wars?

WHY ? ....., because they stupidly hate Bush for something that Dem/liarberal contingent at the time were ALL in favor of taking out Saddam, they do not want the blame to fall on them because THEY.., the Dem/liarberals were the majority during the "invasion", which really was NOT an invasion in the old sense of invasions it was a coalition of UN forces led by American Generals and Admirals.., authorized by BOTH houses of congress !

 

[Sallow]

If it wasn't for the water boarding, your guy couldn't take credit for bin laden. Get over it.

Waterboarding had zero to do with getting Bin Laden.

Same with Bush.

Same with Obama

Actually..you are completely wrong there.

In the debates, Obama said if Bin Laden was in Pakistan? He'd take him out no matter what the consequences were. McCain said that was juvenile and foolish.

Well?

Obama activated a Covert Ops to find and kill Bin Laden.

That was all his doing.

And he was stupid to share credit with Bush..or anyone else, except the people involved.

 

[Wildman]

In your expert, educated, enlightened opinion, did Bush start two wars or not?

NO.., you stupid fuck !!

 

[JT8691]

Why would anyone say that Bush didn't start two wars that he didn't finish and ruined America by torturing POWs like we're the Khmer Rouge?

And can any Republican explain the purpose of the Guantanamo Bay prison?

Can Obama? It's been open for 6 nearly SIX YEARS under his administration.

I'm not defending the Republicans, but seriously I hardly see any Democrats own up to the fact that they've been in power for years and years now and they never say what they're going to do. Or own to their share in the mess that is the government/wars.

It's not being "weak" (that's a way that people work out the cognitive dissonance that they experience), it's "not caring" or "lying".

 

[Camp]

Some things are not lib or con, Rep or Dem. The decision to stay in Afghanistan and Iraq for nation building was Bush's idea. During his campaign for President he said he didn't believe in nation building. He changed his mind and used the war on terror to implement the ideas of the neo cons who had infiltrated his administration and garnered the support of Cheney and Rumsfeld. Bush wasn't bright enough to know he was being used and suckered by those two evil motherfuckers.

One, nation building and "starting TWO unwarranted wars" are two different subjects. Way to obfuscate you ignorant ass.

Two "nation building" has its logistical advantages. Not that you would know or care anything about that, being that you are a pompous know it all doofus.

Three, you are seeing what happens when we abandon those nations to their own dwvices. Not that you care.

Liberals are truthers. All of them. Truthers and I am proving it.

I know the difference between excursions, expeditions and campaigns conducted for specific military purposes, and wars waged to support the implementation of long range, long term and sustained conventional warfare. You don't.
Some have the good sense to read and study military matters that are written by military experts such as retired officers and professors of military history. Some just read shit written by political pundits and agenda driven commentators and think tank sludges. I prefer the former, you seem to prefer the later.

 

[Wildman]

Why would anyone say that Bush didn't start two wars that he didn't finish and ruined America by torturing POWs like we're the Khmer Rouge?

And can any Republican explain the purpose of the Guantanamo Bay prison?

If it wasn't for the water boarding, your guy couldn't take credit for bin laden. Get over it.

Is that what Dick told you?

You know, that is really an insult to all the men and women who searched for Bin Laden, some of whom gave their lives. Nobody claims water boarding helped get Bin Laden except for the war criminals who implemented it and need an excuse for committing that war crime.

prove your assertion. prove that water boarding had NOTHING to do with bin ladens capture/death.

 

[BlindBoo]

I don't think anyone had a problem with President Bush using military force to attack al Qaeda's bases in Afghanistan in an effort to kill of capture those responsible for the 9-11 attacks.

After Tora-Bora, and bin Laden's escape in to Pakistan, the propaganda to invade Iraq began it's year+ long journey to convince America that Saddam was the next Hitler, had operational ties with al Qaeda, had reconstituted his old WMD programs and was actively producing and stockpiling Chemical, Biological and even Nuclear weapons to give the terrorist to hit us with. While that was going on the mission in Afghanistan changed to an occupation and an attempt at Nation Building. But because the focus had shifted to the upcoming (Planned) invasion and occupation of Iraq, both efforts in Afghanistan took second fiddle to the upcoming Iraq war. Of course the finest military in the world (which had majority support from congress and the people) made quick work of the decimated Iraq military. Once the military was finished, the Bush appointees simply fucked up the occupation and sparked the sectarian civil war, that is still going on. After that all the Bush talking points about the threat Iraq posed began to be exposed for the lies they were based on. That's when the citizens began questioning their support for Bushes two wars.

First of all you do not understand one thing about logistics of war, so stop pretending you know something when you don't. It makes look like a hack.

Second there was a lot of evidence of Saddam keeping his programs in place and he violated 17 UN resolutions per UNSCOM. It is clearly spelled out in the report.

Third the democrats propagated the existence of wmds before Bush ever took office, highlighted by Clinton signing the Iraq Liberation Act for wmds.

Fourth, Obama increased the war in Afghanistan not Bush.

I have hardly seen any of you double talking hypocrites talk about the mass drone strikes on terrorists that you all once claimed were myths.

All of the liberals saying Bush started two unwarranted wars are morons. They are truthers. Period.

Pseudo-cons try to control the conversation by stating emphatically what they think the opposition says or does, thus creating a false narrative.

The only thing UNSCOM has was an accounting error. Iraq had purchased more chemical precursors than they could account for. That is UNSCOM couldn't verify that the weapons they could have made with those precursor were destroyed. It was a very small % of the number of weapons UNSCOM verified that Iraq destroyed. Next, you bring up the UN. Where is the resolution authorizing the use of military force to oust the government of Iraq. Then you bring up Democrats and Clinton signing the Iraq liberation Act. First of all there are plenty of war hawks in the Democrat party, second, please reference the part of the Act that calls for the US to invade, occupy and nation build in Iraq. Lastly, Bush never cleaned up the mess he started in Afghanistan by diverting needed resources to Iraq, he left if for the next President. Many liberals wanted Obama to pull out rather than escalate. Looks like that is what is going to happen.

It's easy to spot you pseudo-cons, first you tell create a false narrative, then lamely defend that narrative with a combination of attacks and diversions.

 

[JT8691]

If it wasn't for the water boarding, your guy couldn't take credit for bin laden. Get over it.

Is that what Dick told you?

You know, that is really an insult to all the men and women who searched for Bin Laden, some of whom gave their lives. Nobody claims water boarding helped get Bin Laden except for the war criminals who implemented it and need an excuse for committing that war crime.

prove your assertion. prove that water boarding had NOTHING to do with bin ladens capture/death.

Regardless of whether I agree with you or not, you cannot prove something that doesn't exist. Prove that I don't have 15 tigers in my garage right now that are able to perform ballet.

 

[Wildman]

Yeah, you're right. The truth is stupid.

Iraq: The Media War Plan
U.S. Intelligence and Iraq WMD
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB326/IraqWarPart1-Timeline.pdf
Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein
Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction
The Record on CURVEBALL
THE IRAQ WAR -- PART I:*The U.S. Prepares for Conflict, 2001
THE IRAQ WAR -- PART II: Was There Even a Decision?
THE IRAQ WAR -- PART III: Shaping the Debate

 

[Camp]

Then deny they are truthers? Real simple questions really. I mean how many times do we see them blame Bush for starting TWO wars?

WHY ? ....., because they stupidly hate Bush for something that Dem/liarberal contingent at the time were ALL in favor of taking out Saddam, they do not want the blame to fall on them because THEY.., the Dem/liarberals were the majority during the "invasion", which really was NOT an invasion in the old sense of invasions it was a coalition of UN forces led by American Generals and Admirals.., authorized by BOTH houses of congress !

When America comes under attack, the tradition has always been to stand behind the Commander in Chief. They are the ones who have to administer the defense of the country. Politics are put aside for the good and security of the nation. You may not like the team captain or boss, but he or she is the one in charge and unless or until that changes, it is best to follow instructions, orders and the tactics and strategies the captain, boss or Commander has chosen.
You also give great trust to the Commanders. You do not expect him or her to lie to you or try to trick you.
Bush had an administration full of tricksters and liars. They all got their training in corporate America where making a profit justified just about anything. No morals and no character.

 

[rightwinger]

Why would anyone say that Bush didn't start two wars that he didn't finish and ruined America by torturing POWs like we're the Khmer Rouge?

And can any Republican explain the purpose of the Guantanamo Bay prison?

Can Obama? It's been open for 6 nearly SIX YEARS under his administration.

I'm not defending the Republicans, but seriously I hardly see any Democrats own up to the fact that they've been in power for years and years now and they never say what they're going to do. Or own to their share in the mess that is the government/wars.

It's not being "weak" (that's a way that people work out the cognitive dissonance that they experience), it's "not caring" or "lying".

Bush and the Republicans "poisoned" Guantanamo and made it so we had no other options but to hold them.

Bush made them noncitizens with no protections as either POWs or criminals. No rights to face their accuser or evidence against them, no right to a speedy trial.
He also engaged in torture which makes a fair trial impossible as well as botched all trails of evidence against them
Once Obama took office and threatened to close Gitmo, Republicans and their Fox propaganda arm started the fear mongering that Obama was going to move terrorists to a facility near you. Congress quickly passed a law blocking Obama from moving prisoners

 

[JT8691]

Why would anyone say that Bush didn't start two wars that he didn't finish and ruined America by torturing POWs like we're the Khmer Rouge?

And can any Republican explain the purpose of the Guantanamo Bay prison?

Can Obama? It's been open for 6 nearly SIX YEARS under his administration.

I'm not defending the Republicans, but seriously I hardly see any Democrats own up to the fact that they've been in power for years and years now and they never say what they're going to do. Or own to their share in the mess that is the government/wars.

It's not being "weak" (that's a way that people work out the cognitive dissonance that they experience), it's "not caring" or "lying".

Bush and the Republicans "poisoned" Guantanamo and made it so we had not other options but to hold them.

Bush made them noncitizens with no protections as either POWs or criminals. No rights to face their accuser or evidence against them, no right to a speedy trial.
He also engaged in torture which makes a fair trial impossible as well as botched all trails of evidence against them
Once Obama took office and threatened to close Gitmo, Republicans and their Fox propaganda arm started the fear mongering that Obama was going to move terrorists to a facility near you. Congress quickly passed a law blocking Obama from moving prisoners

If Obama OR the Dems in Congress wanted to close it down they could at the very least start the process. Why hasn't that been done?

 

[Wildman]

Then deny they are truthers? Real simple questions really. I mean how many times do we see them blame Bush for starting TWO wars?

What's your evidence that most liberals opposed the Afghan war in response to 9/11?

Post that.

you stupid fuck, a simple review of this forum and others here on USMB will prove you libertools opposed anything President George W. Bush did, so don't play the liarberals did NOT oppose game here, we Conservatives are on to the liberscum who make that claim.

 

[KNB]

Yeah, you're right. The truth is stupid.

Iraq: The Media War Plan
U.S. Intelligence and Iraq WMD
http://www2.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB326/IraqWarPart1-Timeline.pdf
Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein
Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction
The Record on CURVEBALL
THE IRAQ WAR -- PART I:*The U.S. Prepares for Conflict, 2001
THE IRAQ WAR -- PART II: Was There Even a Decision?
THE IRAQ WAR -- PART III: Shaping the Debate

Yeah, declassified Bush government documents. It's just repetitive bullshit, right? Damn liberal truthers with their truth. Oh, wait. The information all comes from the Bush administration, so the Bush administration were all liberal truthers?

What's the matter? Do you not want to learn the truth about Bush's lies? Lies that you and I and every other American will pay for but Bush won't?

How does the mind of a Republican work? Not very well, apparently.

 

[rightwinger]

Can Obama? It's been open for 6 nearly SIX YEARS under his administration.

I'm not defending the Republicans, but seriously I hardly see any Democrats own up to the fact that they've been in power for years and years now and they never say what they're going to do. Or own to their share in the mess that is the government/wars.

It's not being "weak" (that's a way that people work out the cognitive dissonance that they experience), it's "not caring" or "lying".

Bush and the Republicans "poisoned" Guantanamo and made it so we had not other options but to hold them.

Bush made them noncitizens with no protections as either POWs or criminals. No rights to face their accuser or evidence against them, no right to a speedy trial.
He also engaged in torture which makes a fair trial impossible as well as botched all trails of evidence against them
Once Obama took office and threatened to close Gitmo, Republicans and their Fox propaganda arm started the fear mongering that Obama was going to move terrorists to a facility near you. Congress quickly passed a law blocking Obama from moving prisoners

If Obama OR the Dems in Congress wanted to close it down they could at the very least start the process. Why hasn't that been done?

What process?

Bush destroyed the chance for a fair trial. Releasing them because we have no evidence is the only legal remedy. What will the Conservative response be when we start to release these guys?

We have already seen what the response is when we released five of them

 

[KNB]

If Obama OR the Dems in Congress wanted to close it down they could at the very least start the process. Why hasn't that been done?

Because Republicans would campaign on a message of "DEMOCRATS SUPPORT TERRORISM!" like they've done with Benghazi, Baghdadi, Crimea, Syria, Libya, etc.

And because the Democrats are half of the power structure that collectively wants endless war for private profit.

 

[Camp]

If it wasn't for the water boarding, your guy couldn't take credit for bin laden. Get over it.

Is that what Dick told you?

You know, that is really an insult to all the men and women who searched for Bin Laden, some of whom gave their lives. Nobody claims water boarding helped get Bin Laden except for the war criminals who implemented it and need an excuse for committing that war crime.

prove your assertion. prove that water boarding had NOTHING to do with bin ladens capture/death.

http://techdirt.com/articles/20140331/07281826744/senate-report-says-cia-repeatedly-lied-about-fact-that-its-torture-efforts-were-useless-finding-bin-laden.s

Here is a review by tech dirt of the 40 million dollar Senate report that shows how the CIA lied to promote alleged success's attributed to torture. So now it's your turn to show us who, besides the people who are accused of committing the war crime of torture or one of their spokespersons or minions, claim it helped catch Bin Laden.

 

[kaz]

Iraq and Afghanistan attacked us?

Iraq no, Afghanistan yes. You may have heard of it, it's called "9/11." There is something seriously wrong with you.

How many of the terrorists were Afghans?

What difference does that make? The Taliban assisted Al Qaeda. I really thought I couldn't think any less of you big guy. I stand corrected.

Bush started Iraq, no doubt about it. But Afghanistan? You're really a slug of a human being.

 

[KNB]

"What difference does it make?" Where have I heard that before?