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.
But a candidate's dishonesty should always be pointed out.If the person who leads a nation can only be one who does not lie, the entire world would be without leaders.
And that includes the royal drones as well.
There were no nukes and or capacity for such and that is what GWB meant. We can let The Hague sort it out.
The United Nations and the World Court in the Hague will be nothing but a well forgotten exercise in futility before anyone would or could take GWB in front of a bunch of nobodies, who are not nobodies now, due only to the grace of the United States of America.
Might happen when Obama takes control of the UN.
But a candidate's dishonesty should always be pointed out.If the person who leads a nation can only be one who does not lie, the entire world would be without leaders.
And that includes the royal drones as well.
There were no nukes and or capacity for such and that is what GWB meant. We can let The Hague sort it out.
The United Nations and the World Court in the Hague will be nothing but a well forgotten exercise in futility before anyone would or could take GWB in front of a bunch of nobodies, who are not nobodies now, due only to the grace of the United States of America.
Might happen when Obama takes control of the UN.
But if Trump or Cruz get elected, either would be able, ready and willing to evict that rat hole of free loaders aka the United Nations from the shores of the United States and the Secretary of that defunct organization will be nothing but an unemployed bum.
The problem with the GWB hate crowd is that the UN did nothing to stop the removal of the Butcher of Baghdad. The arab world did nothing. Congress approved going to war. Yes, they may have left it up to Bush but none the less they voted to let him.
The problem with the GWB hate crowd is that the UN did nothing to stop the removal of the Butcher of Baghdad. The arab world did nothing. Congress approved going to war. Yes, they may have left it up to Bush but none the less they voted to let him.
You need to turn off talk radio and study history.
Ronald Reagan helped Hussein consolidate his power. Reagan had Iraq removed from the official list of terrorist nations so that he could fund and weaponize Hussein.
Reagan was playing chess against the Soviets, with each side trying to accumulate regional assets. We lost a vital ally in Iran (the Shaw), which loss heightened the need for another regional asset. Hussein was seen as a good choice because he was initially friendly to U.S. oil needs and he had the power to control the violent tribal sects. Reagan supported this madman because Hussein was seen as the best choice at that time by the Reagan administration, who was much more willing to make deals with terrorist petrol-states than Carter. [Unlike Carter the anti-oil crusader, reagan knew that our near-term energy needs required the Middle East] Point is: we made this violent madman stronger, and people like you don't even know it. This is not a secret. It's on the record. Go the fucking Reagan Library. Study his Middle East policies. Every leader makes tough choices. Reagan did the same thing with the Mujahideen in Afghanistan (an early version of Al Qaeda that included a young Bin Laden). Reagan wanted to trap the Soviets in Afghanistan so he trained and funded the opposition. Reagan was successful against the Soviets, but he made all these terrorist groups stronger. And now we are lying in that bed.
You should study actual policy papers so that your contributions to this forum are more interesting.
FYI: I don't think Reagan was necessarily wrong for funding terrorists to fight the Soviets. I don't think Reagan was necessarily wrong for supporting Hussein, especially after we lost the Shaw in neighboring Iraq. These were hard choices to make in the face of terrible options. Carter didn't trust Hussein or these terrorist groups as much as Reagan. Carter believed that alliances with these evil doers would eventually come back to haunt us, and pose problems far worse than a fledgling Soviet Union that was already being unwound by Gorby. Even so, neither of us now how complicated the world was or is - but it helps to know actual history rather than constantly repeating Republican talking points about Hussein.
Educate yourself.The next election is important. A Republican will win, but it should be the one who is most qualified to understand a complex world. We can no longer afford your ignorance.
The problem with the GWB hate crowd is that the UN did nothing to stop the removal of the Butcher of Baghdad. The arab world did nothing. Congress approved going to war. Yes, they may have left it up to Bush but none the less they voted to let him.
You need to turn off talk radio and study history.
Ronald Reagan helped Hussein consolidate his power. Reagan had Iraq removed from the official list of terrorist nations so that he could fund and weaponize Hussein.
Reagan was playing chess against the Soviets, with each side trying to accumulate regional assets. We lost a vital ally in Iran (the Shaw), which loss heightened the need for another regional asset. Hussein was seen as a good choice because he was initially friendly to U.S. oil needs and he had the power to control the violent tribal sects. Reagan supported this madman because Hussein was seen as the best choice at that time by the Reagan administration, who was much more willing to make deals with terrorist petrol-states than Carter. [Unlike Carter the anti-oil crusader, reagan knew that our near-term energy needs required the Middle East] Point is: we made this violent madman stronger, and people like you don't even know it. This is not a secret. It's on the record. Go the fucking Reagan Library. Study his Middle East policies. Every leader makes tough choices. Reagan did the same thing with the Mujahideen in Afghanistan (an early version of Al Qaeda that included a young Bin Laden). Reagan wanted to trap the Soviets in Afghanistan so he trained and funded the opposition. Reagan was successful against the Soviets, but he made all these terrorist groups stronger. And now we are lying in that bed.
You should study actual policy papers so that your contributions to this forum are more interesting.
FYI: I don't think Reagan was necessarily wrong for funding terrorists to fight the Soviets. I don't think Reagan was necessarily wrong for supporting Hussein, especially after we lost the Shaw in neighboring Iraq. These were hard choices to make in the face of terrible options. Carter didn't trust Hussein or these terrorist groups as much as Reagan. Carter believed that alliances with these evil doers would eventually come back to haunt us, and pose problems far worse than a fledgling Soviet Union that was already being unwound by Gorby. Even so, neither of us now how complicated the world was or is - but it helps to know actual history rather than constantly repeating Republican talking points about Hussein.
Educate yourself.The next election is important. A Republican will win, but it should be the one who is most qualified to understand a complex world. We can no longer afford your ignorance.
A question for Republicans.
Is Trump right about Bush? Did George Bush lie and thereby commit a war crime?
or
Is Trump an uninformed moron who says things without sufficient evidence, thus making him an untrustworthy commander in chief?
or
Is Trump a liar who merely says things for personal gain, making him unfit for office?
Yeah - "rape rooms".There were WMDs and WMDs were not the only reason we went into Iraq.
Yeah - "rape rooms".There were WMDs and WMDs were not the only reason we went into Iraq.
After all this flailin' and failin', are you going to answer the OP?The Hague has no authority to sort shit out in this casee.
Oddly enough, we all already know that W did not "lie." Even if we assume (without proof) that Saddam had no WMD, it would still only be a "lie" if W knew that for a fact in advance but said he did despite that knowledge.
He could call the former (impeached and disgraced) President, Bubba, as a witness to establish that he didn't know the claim was "false" even if it was ultimately incorrect. And he could call our present incompetent Secretary of State (John F'n Lurch Kerry). And the former incompetent Secretary of State (Shrillary).
And no. There is also no valid evidence that when W spoke of Saddam's WMD, he was alluding to any claim that Saddam had nukes.
Trump just said it again - at his Ohio rally:
Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
Trump has said Bush lied about Iraq/ WMDs.
4,000+ Americans died in Iraq, and the Middle East was destabilized for generations, making Bush's lie a war crime of the highest order.
A question for Republicans.
Is Trump right about Bush? Did George Bush lie and thereby commit a war crime?
or
Is Trump an uninformed moron who says things without sufficient evidence, thus making him an untrustworthy commander in chief?
or
Is Trump a liar who merely says things for personal gain, making him unfit for office?
Either Trump is an uninformed moron or a liar or George Bush should be prosecuted for war crimes,
Which is it?
Israel has been in violation since the 1970s. Should we bomb them, too, dumbass?Yeah - "rape rooms".There were WMDs and WMDs were not the only reason we went into Iraq.
Or violation of sanctions. Keep moving, fool
Trump just said it again - at his Ohio rally:
Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
Trump has said Bush lied about Iraq/ WMDs.
4,000+ Americans died in Iraq, and the Middle East was destabilized for generations, making Bush's lie a war crime of the highest order.
A question for Republicans.
Is Trump right about Bush? Did George Bush lie and thereby commit a war crime?
or
Is Trump an uninformed moron who says things without sufficient evidence, thus making him an untrustworthy commander in chief?
or
Is Trump a liar who merely says things for personal gain, making him unfit for office?
Either Trump is an uninformed moron or a liar or George Bush should be prosecuted for war crimes,
Which is it?
I think it is funny the repub choice is saying everything the Dems have for years. Looks like the Dems were right all along.
Israel has been in violation since the 1970s. Should we bomb them, too, dumbass?Yeah - "rape rooms".There were WMDs and WMDs were not the only reason we went into Iraq.
Or violation of sanctions. Keep moving, fool
66 of them:Israel has been in violation since the 1970s. Should we bomb them, too, dumbass?Yeah - "rape rooms".There were WMDs and WMDs were not the only reason we went into Iraq.
Or violation of sanctions. Keep moving, fool
What violation, dumb ass?
Trump just said it again - at his Ohio rally:
Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
Trump has said Bush lied about Iraq/ WMDs.
4,000+ Americans died in Iraq, and the Middle East was destabilized for generations, making Bush's lie a war crime of the highest order.
A question for Republicans.
Is Trump right about Bush? Did George Bush lie and thereby commit a war crime?
or
Is Trump an uninformed moron who says things without sufficient evidence, thus making him an untrustworthy commander in chief?
or
Is Trump a liar who merely says things for personal gain, making him unfit for office?
Either Trump is an uninformed moron or a liar or George Bush should be prosecuted for war crimes,
Which is it?
I think it is funny the repub choice is saying everything the Dems have for years. Looks like the Dems were right all along.
Except you're not right, there were WMDs and that is not the only reason we went to Iraq. Facts are pesky little gomers
Trump just said it again - at his Ohio rally:
Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction.
Trump has said Bush lied about Iraq/ WMDs.
4,000+ Americans died in Iraq, and the Middle East was destabilized for generations, making Bush's lie a war crime of the highest order.
A question for Republicans.
Is Trump right about Bush? Did George Bush lie and thereby commit a war crime?
or
Is Trump an uninformed moron who says things without sufficient evidence, thus making him an untrustworthy commander in chief?
or
Is Trump a liar who merely says things for personal gain, making him unfit for office?
Either Trump is an uninformed moron or a liar or George Bush should be prosecuted for war crimes,
Which is it?
I think it is funny the repub choice is saying everything the Dems have for years. Looks like the Dems were right all along.
Except you're not right, there were WMDs and that is not the only reason we went to Iraq. Facts are pesky little gomers
So you are saying trump is wrong? The majority of repubs disagree with you. They agree with what the Dems have been saying all along. The wars and 9/11 are on bush.
66 of them:Israel has been in violation since the 1970s. Should we bomb them, too, dumbass?Yeah - "rape rooms".There were WMDs and WMDs were not the only reason we went into Iraq.
Or violation of sanctions. Keep moving, fool
What violation, dumb ass?
Lessons to be Learned From 66 U.N. Resolutions Israel Ignores
My sigline is as true as ever.
Yeah - "rape rooms".There were WMDs and WMDs were not the only reason we went into Iraq.
