Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Oh no, conservatives are still trying to spread the blame for the Iraq War. How embarrasing.
Most Dems voted against it in the House. Just over half of Dem Senators made the mistake of voting in favor of war. And on the GOP side, only six whopping GOPers were smart enough to see what a mistake it was going to be.
And in the years between the start of the Iraq War Mistake and the 2004 election, the rhetoric from the GOP and conservatives made it clear that to them all liberals and Democrats were de facto enemies of America. In other words, the GOP decided to take full ownership of the Iraq War.
It was the GOP's idea, they supported it, they owned it. And the negative electoral consequences that the GOP suffered since the occupation of Iraq was so badly managed was entirely justified.
you are wrong, see below
Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction
It's funny how you guys always leave out this quote:
What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Barack Obama 44th President of the US
I'm not threatening anyone. But you need to keep my job situation out of this thread. It's irrelevant.
I can call for war if I want, it's not that I don't want to go, I CAN'T go. The Army wouldn't even look at me. I've applied to the National Guard and inquired about enlisting in the Army. They both won't take me for lack of emotional stability. So, in essence I still do have the right to my opinions about war.
I live in a military family. Many generations before me have fought in a war, from WWI to the Gulf War. I know exactly what kind of sacrifice it entails. Don't think I'm ignorant of what the hells of war entail.
Oh bullshit. If you had ANY IDEA, you'd stop posturing. "The hell that war entails" is a talking point you use when people call you out on your shit.
And oh yeah. Somebody that won't be taken by any branch of the military because he really should be a guest at the Waldorf Hysteria is EXACTLY who we should be listening to when it comes to grave military decisions.
chicken hawks love sending other people to die so long as their own butts are safe at home.
Oh no, conservatives are still trying to spread the blame for the Iraq War. How embarrasing.
Most Dems voted against it in the House. Just over half of Dem Senators made the mistake of voting in favor of war. And on the GOP side, only six whopping GOPers were smart enough to see what a mistake it was going to be.
And in the years between the start of the Iraq War Mistake and the 2004 election, the rhetoric from the GOP and conservatives made it clear that to them all liberals and Democrats were de facto enemies of America. In other words, the GOP decided to take full ownership of the Iraq War.
It was the GOP's idea, they supported it, they owned it. And the negative electoral consequences that the GOP suffered since the occupation of Iraq was so badly managed was entirely justified.
you are wrong, see below
Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction
Yes, we've all seen the unconvincing arguments that Democrats are equally to blame for the Iraq War fiasco. The arguments are not working. They will never work. Nice try though.
It's funny how you guys always leave out this quote:
What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Barack Obama 44th President of the US
That doesnt really invalidate the others, does it?
And if Obama believed that, why did he order a surge in Afghanistan?
Oh no, conservatives are still trying to spread the blame for the Iraq War. How embarrasing.
Most Dems voted against it in the House. Just over half of Dem Senators made the mistake of voting in favor of war. And on the GOP side, only six whopping GOPers were smart enough to see what a mistake it was going to be.
And in the years between the start of the Iraq War Mistake and the 2004 election, the rhetoric from the GOP and conservatives made it clear that to them all liberals and Democrats were de facto enemies of America. In other words, the GOP decided to take full ownership of the Iraq War.
It was the GOP's idea, they supported it, they owned it. And the negative electoral consequences that the GOP suffered since the occupation of Iraq was so badly managed was entirely justified.
you are wrong, see below
Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction
Yes, we've all seen the unconvincing arguments that Democrats are equally to blame for the Iraq War fiasco. The arguments are not working. They will never work. Nice try though.
It's funny how you guys always leave out this quote:
What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income — to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Barack Obama 44th President of the US
I guess that explains why he let 4 americans die in Benghazi.
The fact remains that most dems supported the stupid Iraq 'war'. They authorized and funded it, just like they did with Viet Nam where we lost 58,000 americans and billions of dollars for NOTHING.
It's funny how you guys always leave out this quote:
What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Barack Obama 44th President of the US
That doesnt really invalidate the others, does it?
And if Obama believed that, why did he order a surge in Afghanistan?
The Afghanistan War was justified. The Iraq War was not.
Obama ordered a surge in Afghanistan to undo the damage that the GOP did by needlessly putting so many resources into the failed & flopped Iraq Debacle.
It's funny how you guys always leave out this quote:
What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Barack Obama 44th President of the US
I guess that explains why he let 4 americans die in Benghazi.
The fact remains that most dems supported the stupid Iraq 'war'. They authorized and funded it, just like they did with Viet Nam where we lost 58,000 americans and billions of dollars for NOTHING.
Is that really the best you guys got? Bush sends 7000 Americans to their death in Iraq and all you can reply is......What about Benghazi?
Sure, but the fact remains that both Romney and Palin predicted exactly what is happening today and Obama said it would never happen. They were right, he was wrong.
The onus is now on you to provide the EXACT quotes where they claimed that Russia would intervene when the Ukraine dissolved into a civil war.
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73tGe3JE5IU"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73tGe3JE5IU[/ame]
Palin Mocked in 2008 for Warning Putin May Invade Ukraine if Obama Elected
You lose.
I guess that explains why he let 4 americans die in Benghazi.
The fact remains that most dems supported the stupid Iraq 'war'. They authorized and funded it, just like they did with Viet Nam where we lost 58,000 americans and billions of dollars for NOTHING.
Is that really the best you guys got? Bush sends 7000 Americans to their death in Iraq and all you can reply is......What about Benghazi?
At least Bush didn't lie about how they died.
[
Is that really the best you guys got? Bush sends 7000 Americans to their death in Iraq and all you can reply is......What about Benghazi?
At least Bush didn't lie about how they died.
I guess that explains why he let 4 americans die in Benghazi.
The fact remains that most dems supported the stupid Iraq 'war'. They authorized and funded it, just like they did with Viet Nam where we lost 58,000 americans and billions of dollars for NOTHING.
Is that really the best you guys got? Bush sends 7000 Americans to their death in Iraq and all you can reply is......What about Benghazi?
At least Bush didn't lie about how they died.
It's funny how you guys always leave out this quote:
What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne.
What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression. That's what I'm opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.
Barack Obama 44th President of the US
I guess that explains why he let 4 americans die in Benghazi.
The fact remains that most dems supported the stupid Iraq 'war'. They authorized and funded it, just like they did with Viet Nam where we lost 58,000 americans and billions of dollars for NOTHING.
Is that really the best you guys got? Bush sends 7000 Americans to their death in Iraq and all you can reply is......What about Benghazi?
[
And what did we get when Obama wasted our resources in Libya, hmm?
Is that really the best you guys got? Bush sends 7000 Americans to their death in Iraq and all you can reply is......What about Benghazi?
At least Bush didn't lie about how they died.
The smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud
They will treat us as liberators
Mission Accomplished
At least Bush didn't lie about how they died.
The smoking gun will be a mushroom cloud
They will treat us as liberators
Mission Accomplished
Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction
The current Bush administration discusses Iraq in starkly moralistic terms to further its goal of persuading a skeptical world that a preemptive and premeditated attack on Iraq could and should be supported as a "just war." The documents included in this briefing book reflect the realpolitik that determined this country's policies during the years when Iraq was actually employing chemical weapons. Actual rather than rhetorical opposition to such use was evidently not perceived to serve U.S. interests; instead, the Reagan administration did not deviate from its determination that Iraq was to serve as the instrument to prevent an Iranian victory. Chemical warfare was viewed as a potentially embarrassing public relations problem that complicated efforts to provide assistance. The Iraqi government's repressive internal policies, though well known to the U.S. government at the time, did not figure at all in the presidential directives that established U.S. policy toward the Iran-Iraq war. The U.S. was concerned with its ability to project military force in the Middle East, and to keep the oil flowing.
Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein
In 2012 there is no way that either Romney or Palin could have predicted that the Ukraine would degenerate into a civil war in 2014 so that allegation is utter nonsense!
Secondly let's put this into context. If Mexico were to dissolve into a civil war US troops would be sent in to "protect American interests". Russia is doing the name thing because the neighboring state of Ukraine is undergoing a civil war. Obviously Russia would prefer that the outcome favor Russian interests and there is no incentive for the EU nations to intervene.
Finally it is utterly ludicrous to expect Obama to intervene militarily in this conflict. Who are US troops supposed to attack over there? What is the objective? "Nation building"? What is the exit plan?
Your entire OP is predicated on a notion that Russia is some kind of "threat" to the USA. You have failed to make that case just as you failed to establish that Romney and Palin had the powers of precognition.
In essence all you wanted was a stick to beat Obama with and this one is a wet noodle!
I have the quotes, Derideo. Might it be the one with the wet noodle here is you?
Then produce them, TK!
[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73tGe3JE5IU"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=73tGe3JE5IU[/ame]
I bolded the part of your post that is correct.
Both parties voted to authorize and fund the stupid waste of lives and money known as the Iraq war. Both parties are responsible
Romney lost because; he did not attack obama on his failures, a biased media, black pride, and white guilt. He did not lose on policy.
Romney's policies were right, that is becoming more evident every day.
Once again you parrot the 'company' line. Keep in mind the Bush Administration invaded and occupied Iraq without cause; for the first time in our nations history we invaded and occupied a sovereign nation without ourselves being attacked. The vote to authorize a military response was political, had anyone known that Bush would embark our nation on such a reckless invasion, only Neo Cons would have given he and Cheney Carte Blanch.
That said, how much different is Russia's invasion of Crimea? My concern is our country has ignored the words of Washington and Jefferson:
"It is our true policy to steer clear of permanent alliance with any portion of the foreign world": it was George Washington's Farewell Address to us. The inaugural pledge of Thomas Jefferson was no less clear: "Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations-entangling alliances with none."
Entangling Alliances | Foreign Affairs
"Ukraine has asked Nato to look at all possible ways to help it protect its territorial integrity, foreign minister Sergei Deshchiritsya said today.
"The minister said he had held talks with officials from the United States and the European Union and then asked Nato for help after what Ukraines prime minister described as Russian aggression.
"A request had been made to Nato to look at using all possibilities for protecting the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine, the Ukrainian people and nuclear facilities on Ukrainian territory, he said."
More at:
Ukraine seeks Nato assistance as UN meets - US News | Latest US News Headlines | The Irish Times - Sat, Mar 01, 2014
So what's our President to do?
There was of course ample cause to invade Iraq. The issue was debated for months. Most Dems went along for what was then popular. They opposed it once it became unpopular. Because Dems are the biggest fucking hypocrites to walk the planet.
The Russia/Ukraine adventure is nothing like Iraq. It is more like Afghanistan c.1979. And Obama is playing Jimmy Carter to a T.
