They are really starting to miss ol W, all of you

[Surfer]

We had seven great years under Bush?...The USA survived the Bush years, but barely.

Yes! 2000-2008 were the best years EVER! The DOW was at an all-time high (over 15,150!), so was housing, employment and confidence. All this despite 911 and the wars. More Americans became millionaires under W than ever before. We were doing phenomenally well until the filthy liberals took over Congress in 07. Within a year we were completely and utterly fcked and have never recovered. That POS Muslime has unemployment up to 30% in some cities, housing in the toilet, DOW was down to 6,000(!!!), record number of people on handouts, lost our AAA credit rating and confidence was at an all-time low. The stupid Americans elected him twice and the good, decent people are suffering through it. Hussein is the WORST.PRESIDENT. EVER.EVER.EVER!

 

[JRK]

We had seven great years under Bush?

Then why didn't the GOP keep Congress under him?

Why didn't the GOP keep the White House after him?

nbc
abc
cbs
cnn
post
times

one 1/4 truth after another
they talked about EMDs and Iraq as though GWB went at on his own
W lied
people died
162 billion in defict, MY GOD

Look at it now

Look what Dan Rather did in 04
what if GWB had been in office when Benghazi took place

So the "librul media" influence doesn't kick in till 2006? Really? You believe this? This is your argument? This is your best point? I'm so embarrassed for you. You poor thing.

The failure to competently wage the Iraq War is the number one reason why the GOP lost Congress in 2006, and the GOP's destruction of the economy in 2008 is why Obama won.

The USA survived the Bush years, but barely.

Poor thing huh
I remeber much about GWB and his national gaurd record and very little about congress and the war as it is run by the military as well as the white house
Congress allocates
The UE rate in 2006 was 5%, by 2008 it was 7%
The last GOP voted budget had a defict was 162 billion
By 2009 it was 1.54 trilliom
I cannot give you a better example as to how the media has you thinking congress runs our wars and that the UE rate in 06 was 5% and in 08 went to 7% and by 2010 was over 9%
GOP had nothing to do with congress after 06
there last budget was 07

In the context of the Iraq War, the surge refers to United States President George W. Bush's 2007 increase in the number of American troops in order to provide security to Baghdad and Al Anbar Province.[1]

The surge had been developed under the working title "The New Way Forward" and it was announced in January 2007 by Bush during a television speech.[2][3] Bush ordered the deployment of more than 20,000 soldiers into Iraq, five additional brigades, and sent the majority of them into Baghdad.[2] He also extended the tour of most of the Army troops in country and some of the Marines already in the Anbar Province area.[2] The President described the overall objective as establishing a "...unified, democratic federal Iraq that can govern itself, defend itself, and sustain itself, and is an ally in the War on Terror."[3] The major element of the strategy was a change in focus for the US military "to help Iraqis clear and secure neighborhoods, to help them protect the local population, and to help ensure that the Iraqi forces left behind are capable of providing the security".[2] The President stated that the surge would then provide the time and conditions conducive to reconciliation among political and ethnic factions.[3]

Iraq War troop surge of 2007 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Poor thing needs to be educaterd in how out govt works

 

[Vox]

In the bubble, it is possible to both forget what happened in the past...and remember it....depending on how it fits the narrative.

Bill Clinton is to blame for 9/11. President Obama is to blame for the recession. It is like magic.

19 insanly motivated terrorist are to blame for 9-11
stupid people loaning stupid people to much wealth caused the great recession
why are you blaming BC and BHO?
you got some issue with them?
get real dude

19 insanly motivated terrorists were guided by insanely motivated osama, whose precious persona could have been in the prison cell if it won't be the choice of the beloved by left Clinton to not take care of him. So 9/11 is directly linked to his refusal and is Clinton's blame if one wants to blame a president for it

 

[JakeStarkey]

The American people, if they had their way, would have George and his war cronies in orange jump suits, with bags over their heads, handcuffed to their seats, and on their way to the Hague for war crime trials.

 

[birddog]

In the bubble, it is possible to both forget what happened in the past...and remember it....depending on how it fits the narrative.

Bill Clinton is to blame for 9/11. President Obama is to blame for the recession. It is like magic.

19 insanly motivated terrorist are to blame for 9-11
stupid people loaning stupid people to much wealth caused the great recession
why are you blaming BC and BHO?
you got some issue with them?
get real dude

19 insanly motivated terrorists were guided by insanely motivated osama, whose precious persona could have been in the prison cell if it won't be the choice of the beloved by left Clinton to not take care of him. So 9/11 is directly linked to his refusal and is Clinton's blame if one wants to blame a president for it

You are correct. Also, Clinton and cohorts were primarily responsible for the economic crash.

That said, Bush made mistakes such as putting ground troops into Iraq. He also played too nice with the libtards at times.

 

[Vox]

Fake "republican" with his servitude licking the boots of the left lying again

 

[Vox]

19 insanly motivated terrorist are to blame for 9-11
stupid people loaning stupid people to much wealth caused the great recession
why are you blaming BC and BHO?
you got some issue with them?
get real dude

19 insanly motivated terrorists were guided by insanely motivated osama, whose precious persona could have been in the prison cell if it won't be the choice of the beloved by left Clinton to not take care of him. So 9/11 is directly linked to his refusal and is Clinton's blame if one wants to blame a president for it

You are correct. Also, Clinton and cohorts were primarily responsible for the economic crash.

That said, Bush made mistakes such as putting ground troops into Iraq. He also played too nice with the libtards at times.

Yep. Being too nice is the main fault in the uber partisan world of American politics. Plus, the war should have been conducted as a war , not like a cheezy-pleasy appeasement of the media, which lied and lied and lied anyway.

 

[JRK]

19 insanly motivated terrorist are to blame for 9-11
stupid people loaning stupid people to much wealth caused the great recession
why are you blaming BC and BHO?
you got some issue with them?
get real dude

19 insanly motivated terrorists were guided by insanely motivated osama, whose precious persona could have been in the prison cell if it won't be the choice of the beloved by left Clinton to not take care of him. So 9/11 is directly linked to his refusal and is Clinton's blame if one wants to blame a president for it

You are correct. Also, Clinton and cohorts were primarily responsible for the economic crash.

That said, Bush made mistakes such as putting ground troops into Iraq. He also played too nice with the libtards at times.

Saddam had to go
we were fighting Al Qeada as well as numerous other terrorist groups in Iraq
Iraq gave up for the most part in weeks

 

[JakeStarkey]

And then for five years killed 4000 Americans.

Neo-con history will be taught as the attempt of the unjustified to justify the unjustifiable.

That heavens neo-conservatism, the failed ideology of former liberals, is dying in America.

 

[Surfer]

The American people, if they had their way, would have George and his war cronies in orange jump suits, with bags over their heads, handcuffed to their seats, and on their way to the Hague for war crime trials.

Only the idiot Americans who voted for Hussein.

The good, decent, patriotic Americans supported W and the wars. Now that we realize dirty Muslimes do not appreciate anything we do for them, most of us would have chosen not to support the wars. Let the filthy Muslimes annihilate each other. That's all they're good for. Maggots.

 

[Surfer]

19 insanly motivated terrorists were guided by insanely motivated osama

I would take that a step further and say the Muslimes are motivated by allah, their moon god. They are taught from birth to do ANYTHING for him to advance their demonic cause. Their vile Koran COMMANDS them to kill Jews and Christians. Most of them are stupid enough to believe it, support it, and do it.

 

[birddog]

19 insanly motivated terrorists were guided by insanely motivated osama, whose precious persona could have been in the prison cell if it won't be the choice of the beloved by left Clinton to not take care of him. So 9/11 is directly linked to his refusal and is Clinton's blame if one wants to blame a president for it

You are correct. Also, Clinton and cohorts were primarily responsible for the economic crash.

That said, Bush made mistakes such as putting ground troops into Iraq. He also played too nice with the libtards at times.

Saddam had to go
we were fighting Al Qeada as well as numerous other terrorist groups in Iraq
Iraq gave up for the most part in weeks

True, but other procedures could have been used. Continued, intensified strategic bombing could have gotten Saddam. Sanctions that had real teeth in the region should have been used.

Honesty that we were doing it for oil, Israel, and perhaps the Industrial Military Complex should have been exposed better.

In spite of his shortcomings, Bush was still a far superior President to the lying, incompetent POS we have now!

 

[JRK]

You are correct. Also, Clinton and cohorts were primarily responsible for the economic crash.

That said, Bush made mistakes such as putting ground troops into Iraq. He also played too nice with the libtards at times.

Saddam had to go
we were fighting Al Qeada as well as numerous other terrorist groups in Iraq
Iraq gave up for the most part in weeks

True, but other procedures could have been used. Continued, intensified strategic bombing could have gotten Saddam. Sanctions that had real teeth in the region should have been used.

Honesty that we were doing it for oil, Israel, and perhaps the Industrial Military Complex should have been exposed better.

In spite of his shortcomings, Bush was still a far superior President to the lying, incompetent POS we have now!

Bird dog your right
let me add that in all the sanctions and oil, Saddam did find time to murder some say 1 million people
the 2 books I read by the seals agreed with the air power, flatten lets say Fallujah would have saved 1000s of Coalition lives
but the brass was worried about the fallout from such a mass event

 

[birddog]

Saddam had to go
we were fighting Al Qeada as well as numerous other terrorist groups in Iraq
Iraq gave up for the most part in weeks

True, but other procedures could have been used. Continued, intensified strategic bombing could have gotten Saddam. Sanctions that had real teeth in the region should have been used.

Honesty that we were doing it for oil, Israel, and perhaps the Industrial Military Complex should have been exposed better.

In spite of his shortcomings, Bush was still a far superior President to the lying, incompetent POS we have now!

Bird dog your right
let me add that in all the sanctions and oil, Saddam did find time to murder some say 1 million people
the 2 books I read by the seals agreed with the air power, flatten lets say Fallujah would have saved 1000s of Coalition lives
but the brass was worried about the fallout from such a mass event

Sanctions they had did not have teeth. We probably did and still do need to fire the UN, and get them the hell out of the way! It won't happen, but it should.

It's true the powers probably were concerned about the potential "Kerry-like" protests. Bush could have been stronger, but it was and it is a political world.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The American people, if they had their way, would have George and his war cronies in orange jump suits, with bags over their heads, handcuffed to their seats, and on their way to the Hague for war crime trials.

Only the idiot Americans who voted for Hussein.

The good, decent, patriotic Americans supported W and the wars. Now that we realize dirty Muslimes do not appreciate anything we do for them, most of us would have chosen not to support the wars. Let the filthy Muslimes annihilate each other. That's all they're good for. Maggots.

The good patriotic Americans realized by 2005 they had been hoodwinked by Bush.

Afghanistan was righteous until the exercise turned into nation building and Bush withdrew mountain units, spec ops units, and chopper units for Iraq.

That is where we went from legitimate offense to war crimes waging offensive warfare.

That is how history will judge Bush and his sheeple backers.

 

[BlindBoo]

True, but other procedures could have been used. Continued, intensified strategic bombing could have gotten Saddam. Sanctions that had real teeth in the region should have been used.

Honesty that we were doing it for oil, Israel, and perhaps the Industrial Military Complex should have been exposed better.

In spite of his shortcomings, Bush was still a far superior President to the lying, incompetent POS we have now!

Bird dog your right
let me add that in all the sanctions and oil, Saddam did find time to murder some say 1 million people
the 2 books I read by the seals agreed with the air power, flatten lets say Fallujah would have saved 1000s of Coalition lives
but the brass was worried about the fallout from such a mass event

Sanctions they had did not have teeth. We probably did and still do need to fire the UN, and get them the hell out of the way! It won't happen, but it should.

It's true the powers probably were concerned about the potential "Kerry-like" protests. Bush could have been stronger, but it was and it is a political world.

He was contained. UN Sanctions worked.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0wbpKCdkkQ]Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice Tell The Truth About Iraq - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JRK]

Bird dog your right
let me add that in all the sanctions and oil, Saddam did find time to murder some say 1 million people
the 2 books I read by the seals agreed with the air power, flatten lets say Fallujah would have saved 1000s of Coalition lives
but the brass was worried about the fallout from such a mass event

Sanctions they had did not have teeth. We probably did and still do need to fire the UN, and get them the hell out of the way! It won't happen, but it should.

It's true the powers probably were concerned about the potential "Kerry-like" protests. Bush could have been stronger, but it was and it is a political world.

He was contained. UN Sanctions worked.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0wbpKCdkkQ]Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice Tell The Truth About Iraq - YouTube[/ame]

This is 8 years after the UN sanctions began
The document indicates that 13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we must assume that these quantities are now unaccounted for.



The discovery of a number of 122 mm chemical rocket warheads in a bunker at a storage depot 170 km southwest of Baghdad was much publicized. This was a relatively new bunker and therefore the rockets must have been moved there in the past few years, at a time when Iraq should not have had such munitions.

Iraq states that they were overlooked from 1991 from a batch of some 2,000 that were stored there during the Gulf War. This could be the case. They could also be the tip of a submerged iceberg. The discovery of a few rockets does not resolve but rather points to the issue of several thousands of chemical rockets that are unaccounted for.
Iraq has declared that it produced about 8,500 litres of this biological warfare agent, which it states it unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991. Iraq has provided little evidence for this production and no convincing evidence for its destruction.

Iraq also declared the recent import of chemicals used in propellants, test instrumentation and, guidance and control systems. These items may well be for proscribed purposes. That is yet to be determined. What is clear is that they were illegally brought into Iraq, that is, Iraq or some company in Iraq, circumvented the restrictions imposed by various resolutions.
The recent inspection find in the private home of a scientist of a box of some 3,000 pages of documents, much of it relating to the laser enrichment of uranium support a concern that has long existed that documents might be distributed to the homes of private individuals. This interpretation is refuted by the Iraqi side, which claims that research staff sometimes may bring home papers from their work places. On our side, we cannot help but think that the case might not be isolated and that such placements of documents is deliberate to make discovery difficult and to seek to shield documents by placing them in private homes.



Any further sign of the concealment of documents would be serious. The Iraqi side committed itself at our recent talks to encourage persons to accept access also to private sites. There can be no sanctuaries for proscribed items, activities or documents. A denial of prompt access to any site would be a very serious matter.

The finding of the rockets shows that Iraq needs to make more effort to ensure that its declaration is currently accurate. During my recent discussions in Baghdad, Iraq declared that it would make new efforts in this regard and had set up a committee of investigation. Since then it has reported that it has found a further 4 chemical rockets at a storage depot in Al Taji.



I might further mention that inspectors have found at another site a laboratory quantity of thiodiglycol, a mustard gas precursor.



Whilst I am addressing chemical issues, I should mention a matter, which I reported on 19 December 2002, concerning equipment at a civilian chemical plant at Al Fallujah. Iraq has declared that it had repaired chemical processing equipment previously destroyed under UNSCOM supervision, and had installed it at Fallujah for the production of chlorine and phenols. We have inspected this equipment and are conducting a detailed technical evaluation of it. On completion, we will decide whether this and other equipment that has been recovered by Iraq should be destroyed.

http://www.un.org/depts/unmovic/Bx27.htm
This report was given 11 years after sanctions began and 8 weeks before we invaded
you call this working?
you want to explain that to us?
Let me also add that the UN inspectors had been gone for years and IRAQ had been given fair warning war was coming
you want to explain why Saddam felt he had to bury his air force in the desert?
there is 2 sides to this story and allways has been
this side never got told so we could elect Pelosi 3 years later
, Reid and Obama 5 years later

 

[BlindBoo]

Sanctions they had did not have teeth. We probably did and still do need to fire the UN, and get them the hell out of the way! It won't happen, but it should.

It's true the powers probably were concerned about the potential "Kerry-like" protests. Bush could have been stronger, but it was and it is a political world.

He was contained. UN Sanctions worked.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0wbpKCdkkQ]Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice Tell The Truth About Iraq - YouTube[/ame]

This is 8 years after the UN sanctions began
The document indicates that 13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, we must assume that these quantities are now unaccounted for.



The discovery of a number of 122 mm chemical rocket warheads in a bunker at a storage depot 170 km southwest of Baghdad was much publicized. This was a relatively new bunker and therefore the rockets must have been moved there in the past few years, at a time when Iraq should not have had such munitions.

Iraq states that they were overlooked from 1991 from a batch of some 2,000 that were stored there during the Gulf War. This could be the case. They could also be the tip of a submerged iceberg. The discovery of a few rockets does not resolve but rather points to the issue of several thousands of chemical rockets that are unaccounted for.
Iraq has declared that it produced about 8,500 litres of this biological warfare agent, which it states it unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991. Iraq has provided little evidence for this production and no convincing evidence for its destruction.

Iraq also declared the recent import of chemicals used in propellants, test instrumentation and, guidance and control systems. These items may well be for proscribed purposes. That is yet to be determined. What is clear is that they were illegally brought into Iraq, that is, Iraq or some company in Iraq, circumvented the restrictions imposed by various resolutions.
The recent inspection find in the private home of a scientist of a box of some 3,000 pages of documents, much of it relating to the laser enrichment of uranium support a concern that has long existed that documents might be distributed to the homes of private individuals. This interpretation is refuted by the Iraqi side, which claims that research staff sometimes may bring home papers from their work places. On our side, we cannot help but think that the case might not be isolated and that such placements of documents is deliberate to make discovery difficult and to seek to shield documents by placing them in private homes.



Any further sign of the concealment of documents would be serious. The Iraqi side committed itself at our recent talks to encourage persons to accept access also to private sites. There can be no sanctuaries for proscribed items, activities or documents. A denial of prompt access to any site would be a very serious matter.

The finding of the rockets shows that Iraq needs to make more effort to ensure that its declaration is currently accurate. During my recent discussions in Baghdad, Iraq declared that it would make new efforts in this regard and had set up a committee of investigation. Since then it has reported that it has found a further 4 chemical rockets at a storage depot in Al Taji.



I might further mention that inspectors have found at another site a laboratory quantity of thiodiglycol, a mustard gas precursor.



Whilst I am addressing chemical issues, I should mention a matter, which I reported on 19 December 2002, concerning equipment at a civilian chemical plant at Al Fallujah. Iraq has declared that it had repaired chemical processing equipment previously destroyed under UNSCOM supervision, and had installed it at Fallujah for the production of chlorine and phenols. We have inspected this equipment and are conducting a detailed technical evaluation of it. On completion, we will decide whether this and other equipment that has been recovered by Iraq should be destroyed.

Update 27 January 2003
This report was given 11 years after sanctions began and 8 weeks before we invaded
you call this working?
you want to explain that to us?
Let me also add that the UN inspectors had been gone for years and IRAQ had been given fair warning war was coming
you want to explain why Saddam felt he had to bury his air force in the desert?
there is 2 sides to this story and allways has been
this side never got told so we could elect Pelosi 3 years later
, Reid and Obama 5 years later

Recall the claims from the Bush Administration were that Saddam had reconstituted his Nuclear, Chemical and Biological weapons programs. It was also claimed that he was stockpiling huge amounts of these weapons and that he was xxx months away from having an atomic bomb. Not that there were accounting errors in Iraq's bookkeeping of it's weapons.

 

[JRK]

Boo as I have allways stated
I (we) with any grain of honesty except your side of the story
Saddam fu-ked up. he lied and lied and lied an lied until the point post 9-11 no more
everything we said would be there was there
aged?, yes
junk?
most
but he kept lying
and for some0one to bury part of his own air force why would any-one not believe that he would do the same with anything?
bhttp://www.urbanghostsmedia.com/2011/10/buried-mig-25-foxbat-jet-uncovered-in-iraqi-desert-preserved-us/uried
Al Qaeda was setting up camp there in 2002
Knowing now what we thouhgt we knew then what would be the difference?
If We knew, what would be the diff? you can still google "news stories" that were published denying thesew facts that later came out
mot one rebuttle
Former CIA director George Tenet reveals in his own autobiography, At the Center of the Storm, some of the intelligence that backed up Powell’s presentation. More than one dozen other al Qaeda terrorists had joined Zarqawi in Baghdad. One of them was an Egyptian known as Abu Ayyub al Masri, who had served Osama bin Laden’s deputy, Ayman al Zawahiri, since the 1980s. After Zarqawi was killed in 2006, al Masri took his place as the leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq. Al Masri himself was killed earlier this year, and his widow confirmed that they had moved to central Baghdad in 2002.

Zarqawi and al Masri led a campaign of spectacular terrorist attacks against the Iraqi people, security personnel, and coalition forces. It was their savagery that, to a large extent, brought Iraq to the brink of total chaos—and ultimately provoked the Anbar Awakening. It is crucially important, then, that Zarqawi and al Masri were operating inside Iraq before American or British forces ever set foot there. They were clearly preparing for war.
Al Qaeda in Iraq | The Weekly Standard

The 6000 missing munitions? not one mention any where as to those facts
we got it wrong only by not coming up with a brand new shiney missle (excpet those found just prior to invading)
who know the truth about so much except
Al Qaeda was there ,2002
Saddam was a mass murderer
Saddam was a liar
Saddam had 600 munitions, still missing today

War suck BOO and with out the Saddams d the world there are no wars
just like Assad in Syria
giving up his weapons will not bring back those kids he gassed
no way

 

[BullKurtz]

Bushii had "class." He was of the ruling class no doubt, but he couldn't complete a sentence. I think he was a decent guy, but hopelessly inept and ill trained for the job. Obama's an elitiist, and ill prepared for for policy as well. However, it's interesting that he's carried forward some very neocon leanings.

Really? Dubya completed enough sentences to graduate from both Harvard and Yale, become a multi-millionaire in the baseball business, serve two terms as Governor of Texas and two terms as President of the United States. He guided us through a catastrophic Clinton-caused recession and Clinton-caused attack on the Twin Towers. All while keeping the price of gasoline down and the Dow up.....back when the Dow was ordinary investors, not just the banks like it is today.

How about posting your resume for comparison?