Tony Blair: We blew it

[Correll]

1. So, you are justifying your claim that Cheney was in charge because of what a "Tea zombie" supposedly said?

That's dumb.

2. NOpe Iraq violated the terms of the agreement repeatedly. Have you really managed to edit your memory to "forget" that?

3. I don't want to invade anyone.

Eh, I said that according to the tea zombies Hillary was in charge

Everyone with an IQ above 70 knows Cheney called the shots for Bu$h. Do you remember his "testimony" before the 9/11 commission, he would only testify if Cheney could hold his hand?

The UN was the only party that could make a judgement about a violation of the agreement, not Bu$h, not Blair, not Cheney...and certainly not you

And you don't want to invade anyone? Are you sure, I thought you said you learned lessons for the next time?

1. No one with an IQ above 70 believes that partisan nonsense. THey just say it to be dicks.

2. Fuck the UN.

3. I want the next time we want to remove a Muslim dictator to not have any illusions that the next guy in charge is going to be a brown George Washington.

NOthing in that statement indicates a desire to invade anyone.

Indeed a reasonable person, (if you know any?) might read that as a RELUCTANCE to invade anyone.

 

[paulitician]

Russia, Iran, Al Qaeda, and ISIS are the biggest winners in the Iraq War debacle. It's one of the bloodiest blunders in history. But i'll give Blair some credit for manning-up. Does it really matter though? No, it doesn't. The countless Thousands of innocents are dead and the Middle East is a horrific nightmare.

Would only disagree with your statement that the Iraq War was one of the bloodiest blunders in history. It does not come close to WWII, WWI, Korea, Vietnam, and so many other wars.

Pretty big blunder. The number of innocent women & children slaughtered as a result, still isn't fully known. But we know it's a horrific situation. So horrific, most Americans try to pretend it never happened.

They truly believe their Government is always the 'Good Guy.' Can't blame em too much though. The American Government/Corporate Media Propaganda is very powerful. We have our puppet in Iraq, but was it worth it? All those children dead. It's very sad.

 

[rightwinger]

The lesson to be learned is that absence of evidence is NOT evidence of absence.

When your fantasy is proven untrue....

Cling to the fantasy

When was my "fantasy" proven untrue?

Maybe when they spent three years finding no evidence

Ahh, as I suspected, you have no idea what I am referring to.

The historical fact that there was no evidence of was the destruction of Saddam's chemical weapons.


The fact that no evidence was found of it being destroyed prior to the invasions was understandably seen as evidence that it was not destroyed.

But that was a Logical Fallacy. And intuitive one, but still wrong.

An important lesson that is lost in the efforts to score partisan points.

The logical fallacy is assuming that the only evidence would be the weapons themselves. Any WMD leaves a paper trail and a personal trail. Bush came in looking for ANYTHING. He offered big rewards for evidence showing there were WMDs. There was no documentation of production, testing, storage, transport of WMDs. Not a single person stepped forward saying he was involved in any facet

There were no WMDs

 

[rightwinger]

1. So, you are justifying your claim that Cheney was in charge because of what a "Tea zombie" supposedly said?

That's dumb.

2. NOpe Iraq violated the terms of the agreement repeatedly. Have you really managed to edit your memory to "forget" that?

3. I don't want to invade anyone.

Eh, I said that according to the tea zombies Hillary was in charge

Everyone with an IQ above 70 knows Cheney called the shots for Bu$h. Do you remember his "testimony" before the 9/11 commission, he would only testify if Cheney could hold his hand?

The UN was the only party that could make a judgement about a violation of the agreement, not Bu$h, not Blair, not Cheney...and certainly not you

And you don't want to invade anyone? Are you sure, I thought you said you learned lessons for the next time?

1. No one with an IQ above 70 believes that partisan nonsense. THey just say it to be dicks.

2. Fuck the UN.

3. I want the next time we want to remove a Muslim dictator to not have any illusions that the next guy in charge is going to be a brown George Washington.

NOthing in that statement indicates a desire to invade anyone.

Indeed a reasonable person, (if you know any?) might read that as a RELUCTANCE to invade anyone.

How can you on one hand use a UN resolution as justification to invade and then say.....fuck the UN

 

[frigidweirdo]

When with Dubya admit he effed the whole thing up?

He's done that already. They admit they made mistakes not that it WAS a mistake.

Which are two VERY different things.

Also the mistakes they made were blamed on others. So, all in all, Bush claims he did nothing wrong.

 

[Correll]

1. That I won't pretend that you don't know the answers you are asking for reflects not at all on me. I'm not sure why you want to play this game, but I know you know, you know that I know that you know, ect. You got a point to make about the historical reasons, just come out with it.

In other words you cannot even come up with ONE valid reason, well join the club pal neither can I because their ain't one, the difference between you and I is that you are too dishonest to admit it.

2. NOpe. To recommend that we invade North Korea would be the act of a fool. The reasons are obvious to anyone who has seriously considered the situation for a single moment. For one example. I did not bring up Oppressor being overthrown as a justification, but an step in how the planned outcome did not occur.

Of course it would be and so was recommending invading Iraq as history has clearly demonstrated but that apparently doesn't stop some fools from making weak attempts at justifying it, after all what the heck does history know?

3. YOur agreed that their failures were not our fault. Then you said "but" and went off onto irrelevant tangents.

Of course somebody else's failures are not our fault, I assume that is patently obvious to anyone, your strawman is built on the supposition that because we can agree on the fact that the sky is blue we agree on everything else. The fact that you apparently believe all the bloodshed and squandering of American treasure is irrelevant to whether or not the Iraq War was justified leads one to question your sanity since you appear to be arguing that the negative consequences of an action are irrelevant to evaluating the wisdom of said action, which frankly is insane.

4. Liar.

I knew it was just a matter of time before you attempted to replace reason and evidence with name calling as a basis for your "argument", thanks for confirming my suspicions about you.

1. Blather.

2. Based on what we knew at the time, the invasion seemed a reasonable policy. Ignoring that sets us up for the next war, because we will have lost a historical example of war being waged on bad assumptions and intel.

Why is that your goal? Are partisan points more important to you than avoiding a war?

3. NOpe. Plenty of people blame American for the result in Iraq, all of it, even though much of it was from the failure of the Iraq People to be able to govern themselves and fight themselves. It certainly needs to be said. That is part of the lesson for next time.

 

[paulitician]

1. So, you are justifying your claim that Cheney was in charge because of what a "Tea zombie" supposedly said?

That's dumb.

2. NOpe Iraq violated the terms of the agreement repeatedly. Have you really managed to edit your memory to "forget" that?

3. I don't want to invade anyone.

Eh, I said that according to the tea zombies Hillary was in charge

Everyone with an IQ above 70 knows Cheney called the shots for Bu$h. Do you remember his "testimony" before the 9/11 commission, he would only testify if Cheney could hold his hand?

The UN was the only party that could make a judgement about a violation of the agreement, not Bu$h, not Blair, not Cheney...and certainly not you

And you don't want to invade anyone? Are you sure, I thought you said you learned lessons for the next time?

1. No one with an IQ above 70 believes that partisan nonsense. THey just say it to be dicks.

2. Fuck the UN.

3. I want the next time we want to remove a Muslim dictator to not have any illusions that the next guy in charge is going to be a brown George Washington.

NOthing in that statement indicates a desire to invade anyone.

Indeed a reasonable person, (if you know any?) might read that as a RELUCTANCE to invade anyone.

How can you on one hand use a UN resolution as justification to invade and then say.....fuck the UN

The U.S. Foreign Policy is all about 'Might makes Right.' It condemns others for doing the same awful things it does all the time. No other Nation in the world invades and slaughters more than the U.S. does. It feels it has some sort of 'moral authority' to declare 'Regime Change' and kill on a mass scale.

And it owns the UN and International Justice System. If it didn't, numerous American leaders would be put on trial for War Crimes. Especially for the Iraq War horror.

 

[whitehall]

Blair never said he was sorry for the Iraq war "mistakes". That is an editorialized invention by CNN. Blair said he apologized for the bad intelligence regarding WMD's. The fact that Hillary's husband said Saddam was developing WMD's or that the stated mission was about enforcing U.N. sanctions doesn't seem to have occurred to CNN. The U.S. led Military went farther and faster and took less casualties than any other military action of it's kind and we should be proud but the left can't seem to muster up pride in their own Country. Too bad Harry Truman never apologized for the mess he created in Korea on an executive order that cost the lives of about 50,000 Americans in the three year quagmire not to mention the political legacy we are living with 50 years later but democrats never apologize.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

They blew it the day they started whole effort.

What a terrible tragedy.

Bush was a moron. The GOP was all to bloodthirsty. The democrats voted for it before they voted against and will bear the blood of everyone who died with equal weight.

 

[Correll]

1. So, you are justifying your claim that Cheney was in charge because of what a "Tea zombie" supposedly said?

That's dumb.

2. NOpe Iraq violated the terms of the agreement repeatedly. Have you really managed to edit your memory to "forget" that?

3. I don't want to invade anyone.

Eh, I said that according to the tea zombies Hillary was in charge

Everyone with an IQ above 70 knows Cheney called the shots for Bu$h. Do you remember his "testimony" before the 9/11 commission, he would only testify if Cheney could hold his hand?

The UN was the only party that could make a judgement about a violation of the agreement, not Bu$h, not Blair, not Cheney...and certainly not you

And you don't want to invade anyone? Are you sure, I thought you said you learned lessons for the next time?

1. No one with an IQ above 70 believes that partisan nonsense. THey just say it to be dicks.

2. Fuck the UN.

3. I want the next time we want to remove a Muslim dictator to not have any illusions that the next guy in charge is going to be a brown George Washington.

NOthing in that statement indicates a desire to invade anyone.

Indeed a reasonable person, (if you know any?) might read that as a RELUCTANCE to invade anyone.

How can you on one hand use a UN resolution as justification to invade and then say.....fuck the UN

Because the "UN" is not, imo, an authority that Iraq defined that justifies the war, but that it failed to live up to it's obligations.

This fits in just fine with my rejection of the idea that the UN is in any position to pass judgement on US actions.

Fuck the UN.

 

[gipper]

They blew it the day they started whole effort.

What a terrible tragedy.

Bush was a moron. The GOP was all to bloodthirsty. The democrats voted for it before they voted against and will bear the blood of everyone who died with equal weight.

Unfortunately, no one will be held responsible or face charges.

 

[chikenwing]

Good on him. That took some serious balls.

Give me a fucking break. He was party to the destruction of a country that led to the deaths of countless innocent lives. The ramifications from his decision continue today. He should be strung up by his balls.

You must not want to leave out all the Dems that signed on,and all that intel,the Clinton white house supplied?

 

[rightwinger]

1. So, you are justifying your claim that Cheney was in charge because of what a "Tea zombie" supposedly said?

That's dumb.

2. NOpe Iraq violated the terms of the agreement repeatedly. Have you really managed to edit your memory to "forget" that?

3. I don't want to invade anyone.

Eh, I said that according to the tea zombies Hillary was in charge

Everyone with an IQ above 70 knows Cheney called the shots for Bu$h. Do you remember his "testimony" before the 9/11 commission, he would only testify if Cheney could hold his hand?

The UN was the only party that could make a judgement about a violation of the agreement, not Bu$h, not Blair, not Cheney...and certainly not you

And you don't want to invade anyone? Are you sure, I thought you said you learned lessons for the next time?

1. No one with an IQ above 70 believes that partisan nonsense. THey just say it to be dicks.

2. Fuck the UN.

3. I want the next time we want to remove a Muslim dictator to not have any illusions that the next guy in charge is going to be a brown George Washington.

NOthing in that statement indicates a desire to invade anyone.

Indeed a reasonable person, (if you know any?) might read that as a RELUCTANCE to invade anyone.

How can you on one hand use a UN resolution as justification to invade and then say.....fuck the UN

Because the "UN" is not, imo, an authority that Iraq defined that justifies the war, but that it failed to live up to it's obligations.

This fits in just fine with my rejection of the idea that the UN is in any position to pass judgement on US actions.

Fuck the UN.

Yet it was a supposed violation of a UN resolution that was used as justification

By the way...it turned out the UN was right about Iraq

 

[Jantje_Smit]

1. No one with an IQ above 70 believes that partisan nonsense. THey just say it to be dicks.

2. Fuck the UN.

3. I want the next time we want to remove a Muslim dictator to not have any illusions that the next guy in charge is going to be a brown George Washington.

NOthing in that statement indicates a desire to invade anyone.

Indeed a reasonable person, (if you know any?) might read that as a RELUCTANCE to invade anyone.

Always funny to see you clowns say "fuck the UN" and then saying that Saddam violated UN resolutions so it was ok to invade....


And let me rephrase the question, which country you think will be "reluctantly" invaded next?

 

[Correll]

1. So, you are justifying your claim that Cheney was in charge because of what a "Tea zombie" supposedly said?

That's dumb.

2. NOpe Iraq violated the terms of the agreement repeatedly. Have you really managed to edit your memory to "forget" that?

3. I don't want to invade anyone.

Eh, I said that according to the tea zombies Hillary was in charge

Everyone with an IQ above 70 knows Cheney called the shots for Bu$h. Do you remember his "testimony" before the 9/11 commission, he would only testify if Cheney could hold his hand?

The UN was the only party that could make a judgement about a violation of the agreement, not Bu$h, not Blair, not Cheney...and certainly not you

And you don't want to invade anyone? Are you sure, I thought you said you learned lessons for the next time?

1. No one with an IQ above 70 believes that partisan nonsense. THey just say it to be dicks.

2. Fuck the UN.

3. I want the next time we want to remove a Muslim dictator to not have any illusions that the next guy in charge is going to be a brown George Washington.

NOthing in that statement indicates a desire to invade anyone.

Indeed a reasonable person, (if you know any?) might read that as a RELUCTANCE to invade anyone.

How can you on one hand use a UN resolution as justification to invade and then say.....fuck the UN

Because the "UN" is not, imo, an authority that Iraq defined that justifies the war, but that it failed to live up to it's obligations.

This fits in just fine with my rejection of the idea that the UN is in any position to pass judgement on US actions.

Fuck the UN.

Yet it was a supposed violation of a UN resolution that was used as justification

By the way...it turned out the UN was right about Iraq

The UN was right? How?

Did they predict that there were no WMDs?

Did they predict that the Iraqi would not be able to do democracy together?

Did they predict that the Iraqis would not be effective fighters?

 

[paulitician]

Let's be real, if the U.S. and Great Britain didn't own the UN and International Justice System, many of its leaders would be standing trial for War Crimes. If any other nations had committed the Iraq War atrocity, its leaders would have been held accountable by now. But do you see any Americans or Brits on trial right now? Nope. And you never will.

 

[Correll]

1. No one with an IQ above 70 believes that partisan nonsense. THey just say it to be dicks.

2. Fuck the UN.

3. I want the next time we want to remove a Muslim dictator to not have any illusions that the next guy in charge is going to be a brown George Washington.

NOthing in that statement indicates a desire to invade anyone.

Indeed a reasonable person, (if you know any?) might read that as a RELUCTANCE to invade anyone.

Always funny to see you clowns say "fuck the UN" and then saying that Saddam violated UN resolutions so it was ok to invade....


And let me rephrase the question, which country you think will be "reluctantly" invaded next?

I did not cite the UN. I cited the terms of the cease fire.

The UN, original function was diplomacy, not Authority.

You libs are trying to inflate it's importance. Which is why it should be destroyed.


As to which country will be invaded next, I have no idea.

Do you think we will never invade another country?

 

[Correll]

Let's be real, if the U.S. and Great Britain didn't own the UN and International Justice System, many of its leaders would be standing trial for War Crimes. If any other nations had committed the Iraq War atrocity, its leaders would have been held accountable by now. But do you see any Americans or Brits on trial right now? Nope. And it will never happen.

ANy Soviet leaders ever get tried?

French?

 

[paulitician]

Eh, I said that according to the tea zombies Hillary was in charge

Everyone with an IQ above 70 knows Cheney called the shots for Bu$h. Do you remember his "testimony" before the 9/11 commission, he would only testify if Cheney could hold his hand?

The UN was the only party that could make a judgement about a violation of the agreement, not Bu$h, not Blair, not Cheney...and certainly not you

And you don't want to invade anyone? Are you sure, I thought you said you learned lessons for the next time?

1. No one with an IQ above 70 believes that partisan nonsense. THey just say it to be dicks.

2. Fuck the UN.

3. I want the next time we want to remove a Muslim dictator to not have any illusions that the next guy in charge is going to be a brown George Washington.

NOthing in that statement indicates a desire to invade anyone.

Indeed a reasonable person, (if you know any?) might read that as a RELUCTANCE to invade anyone.

How can you on one hand use a UN resolution as justification to invade and then say.....fuck the UN

Because the "UN" is not, imo, an authority that Iraq defined that justifies the war, but that it failed to live up to it's obligations.

This fits in just fine with my rejection of the idea that the UN is in any position to pass judgement on US actions.

Fuck the UN.

Yet it was a supposed violation of a UN resolution that was used as justification

By the way...it turned out the UN was right about Iraq

The UN was right? How?

Did they predict that there were no WMDs?

Did they predict that the Iraqi would not be able to do democracy together?

Did they predict that the Iraqis would not be effective fighters?

The U.S. wanted war. Hussein allowed inspections for years. Nothing was ever found. And who are we to declare 'No Fly Zones' and Regime Change?' We don't have a moral authority to make such declarations. Bottom line is, the U.S. wanted the Iraq War. It wanted a puppet regime to plunder the oil. Simple as that.

 

[rightwinger]

Eh, I said that according to the tea zombies Hillary was in charge

Everyone with an IQ above 70 knows Cheney called the shots for Bu$h. Do you remember his "testimony" before the 9/11 commission, he would only testify if Cheney could hold his hand?

The UN was the only party that could make a judgement about a violation of the agreement, not Bu$h, not Blair, not Cheney...and certainly not you

And you don't want to invade anyone? Are you sure, I thought you said you learned lessons for the next time?

1. No one with an IQ above 70 believes that partisan nonsense. THey just say it to be dicks.

2. Fuck the UN.

3. I want the next time we want to remove a Muslim dictator to not have any illusions that the next guy in charge is going to be a brown George Washington.

NOthing in that statement indicates a desire to invade anyone.

Indeed a reasonable person, (if you know any?) might read that as a RELUCTANCE to invade anyone.

How can you on one hand use a UN resolution as justification to invade and then say.....fuck the UN

Because the "UN" is not, imo, an authority that Iraq defined that justifies the war, but that it failed to live up to it's obligations.

This fits in just fine with my rejection of the idea that the UN is in any position to pass judgement on US actions.

Fuck the UN.

Yet it was a supposed violation of a UN resolution that was used as justification

By the way...it turned out the UN was right about Iraq

The UN was right? How?

Did they predict that there were no WMDs?

Did they predict that the Iraqi would not be able to do democracy together?

Did they predict that the Iraqis would not be effective fighters?

Google Hans Blix and find out what the UN thought

Bush was afraid Blix would prove there were no WMDs and attacked before he could prove it