Trump: Bush lied about reason for invading Iraq

[flacaltenn]

flacaltenn 13535604

My point is -- the Repubs just needed to point out how BAD the containment policy had been. No need to make up fictions.

Are you now saying that Republicans made up 'fictions'?

Making up 'fictions' is lying where I come from.

Of course they made up fictions. As I just told you -- programs of that size require an ARMY of high tech workers. And there was no "army" in sight.

But as I've also told you -- the 12 years of death and destruction that we had inflicted on IRAQ -- and that YOUR SIDE had no plan for fixing --- was based on those same damn lies.. What part of that don't you understand?

If Dems hands were so clean -- why didn't THEY call B.S. and END the containment? It was all a LIE after all -- wasn't it??

 

[flacaltenn]

flacaltenn 13535604

My point is -- the Repubs just needed to point out how BAD the containment policy had been. No need to make up fictions.

Are you now saying that Republicans made up 'fictions'?

Making up 'fictions' is lying where I come from.

Of course they made up fictions. As I just told you -- programs of that size require an ARMY of high tech workers. And there was no "army" in sight.

But as I've also told you -- the 12 years of death and destruction that we had inflicted on IRAQ -- and that YOUR SIDE had no plan for fixing --- was based on those same damn lies.. What part of that don't you understand?

If Dems hands were so clean -- why didn't THEY call B.S. and END the containment? It was all a LIE after all -- wasn't it??

Lemme answer that last question for ya NotFooledbyW.. . It's because ALL POLITICIANS are lilly-livered cowards when it comes to putting their asses on the line with a tough decision. And PROBABLY because the party bosses would have slapped them silly for speaking out so "irresponsibly" Their only "safe play" was to kick the can down the road.

 

[Dot Com]

flacaltenn 13535604

My point is -- the Repubs just needed to point out how BAD the containment policy had been. No need to make up fictions.

Are you now saying that Republicans made up 'fictions'?

Making up 'fictions' is lying where I come from.

Of course they made up fictions. As I just told you -- programs of that size require an ARMY of high tech workers. And there was no "army" in sight.

But as I've also told you -- the 12 years of death and destruction that we had inflicted on IRAQ -- and that YOUR SIDE had no plan for fixing --- was based on those same damn lies.. What part of that don't you understand?

If Dems hands were so clean -- why didn't THEY call B.S. and END the containment? It was all a LIE after all -- wasn't it??

Lets stay on-topic shall we mkaythanks

Trump calls the last repub admin out for premeditated colossal disaster because the guys brother, who was up on the stage w/ him, claimed he kept us safe.

 

[flacaltenn]

flacaltenn 13535604

My point is -- the Repubs just needed to point out how BAD the containment policy had been. No need to make up fictions.

Are you now saying that Republicans made up 'fictions'?

Making up 'fictions' is lying where I come from.

Of course they made up fictions. As I just told you -- programs of that size require an ARMY of high tech workers. And there was no "army" in sight.

But as I've also told you -- the 12 years of death and destruction that we had inflicted on IRAQ -- and that YOUR SIDE had no plan for fixing --- was based on those same damn lies.. What part of that don't you understand?

If Dems hands were so clean -- why didn't THEY call B.S. and END the containment? It was all a LIE after all -- wasn't it??

Lets stay on-topic shall we mkaythanks

Trump calls the last repub admin out for premeditated volossal disaster

If that's all YOU understand the topic to be about -- would you please keep that to yourself and not tell everyone how narrow-mindedly partisan and ignorant you are "about the topic" ??? The topic is about the LIES. The same lies used by BOTH sides to pummel Iraq in different ways..

 

[Dot Com]

flacaltenn 13535604

My point is -- the Repubs just needed to point out how BAD the containment policy had been. No need to make up fictions.

Are you now saying that Republicans made up 'fictions'?

Making up 'fictions' is lying where I come from.

Of course they made up fictions. As I just told you -- programs of that size require an ARMY of high tech workers. And there was no "army" in sight.

But as I've also told you -- the 12 years of death and destruction that we had inflicted on IRAQ -- and that YOUR SIDE had no plan for fixing --- was based on those same damn lies.. What part of that don't you understand?

If Dems hands were so clean -- why didn't THEY call B.S. and END the containment? It was all a LIE after all -- wasn't it??

Lets stay on-topic shall we mkaythanks

Trump calls the last repub admin out for premeditated volossal disaster

If that's all YOU understand the topic to be about -- would you please keep that to yourself and not tell everyone how narrow-mindedly partisan and ignorant you are "about the topic" ??? The topic is about the LIES. The same lies used by BOTH sides to pummel Iraq in different ways..

If anyone knows what this thread is about, that would be the person who created it. May i suggest you go back and read the OP?

 

[Dot Com]

flacaltenn 13535604

My point is -- the Repubs just needed to point out how BAD the containment policy had been. No need to make up fictions.

Are you now saying that Republicans made up 'fictions'?

Making up 'fictions' is lying where I come from.

Of course they made up fictions. As I just told you -- programs of that size require an ARMY of high tech workers. And there was no "army" in sight.

But as I've also told you -- the 12 years of death and destruction that we had inflicted on IRAQ -- and that YOUR SIDE had no plan for fixing --- was based on those same damn lies.. What part of that don't you understand?

If Dems hands were so clean -- why didn't THEY call B.S. and END the containment? It was all a LIE after all -- wasn't it??

Lets stay on-topic shall we mkaythanks

Trump calls the last repub admin out for premeditated volossal disaster

If that's all YOU understand the topic to be about -- would you please keep that to yourself and not tell everyone how narrow-mindedly partisan and ignorant you are "about the topic" ??? The topic is about the LIES. The same lies used by BOTH sides to pummel Iraq in different ways..

The topic is : one of the candidates in the last debate said Bush kept us safe". Trump called him on it by pointing-out that 9/11 happened on his bro's watch AND they linked Iraq to it as a pretext for invasion (really bad decision) which had nothing to do w/ 9/11

Stop being a mushroom!!!.

Please stay on topic

 

[NotfooledbyW]

flacaltenn 13544341

I WAS PISSED OFF. This is one of the events that activated me politically. So I studied this awful series of mistakes in detail.. As a scientist/engineer -- I KNEW that the REAL weapons of mass destruction would be the THOUSANDS of IRAQI scientists/engineers that had to be working on all those evil schemes. And YET -- no one on the UN side could produce the evidence of that massive workforce.

What event activated you? In this thread Trump is talking about Bush43 lying about WMD and a ground invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

Perhaps you can clarify what event activated you.

If your argument is that Bush didn't lie preceding his US ground invasion of Iraq because everybody except Ron and Dennis lied since 1991, then we may as well go back to when Cain killed Able or whichever way it was.

Seems kinda beside the point doesn't it.

 

[flacaltenn]

flacaltenn 13535604

My point is -- the Repubs just needed to point out how BAD the containment policy had been. No need to make up fictions.

Are you now saying that Republicans made up 'fictions'?

Making up 'fictions' is lying where I come from.

Of course they made up fictions. As I just told you -- programs of that size require an ARMY of high tech workers. And there was no "army" in sight.

But as I've also told you -- the 12 years of death and destruction that we had inflicted on IRAQ -- and that YOUR SIDE had no plan for fixing --- was based on those same damn lies.. What part of that don't you understand?

If Dems hands were so clean -- why didn't THEY call B.S. and END the containment? It was all a LIE after all -- wasn't it??

Lets stay on-topic shall we mkaythanks

Trump calls the last repub admin out for premeditated volossal disaster

If that's all YOU understand the topic to be about -- would you please keep that to yourself and not tell everyone how narrow-mindedly partisan and ignorant you are "about the topic" ??? The topic is about the LIES. The same lies used by BOTH sides to pummel Iraq in different ways..

The topic is : one of the candidates in the last debate said Bush kept us safe". Trump called him on it by pointing-out that 9/11 happened on his bro's watch AND they linked Iraq to it as a pretext for invasion (really bad decision) which had nothing to do w/ 9/11

Stop being a mushroom!!!.

Please stay on topic

Oh you mean this political shit that you guys live for??

“Obviously, the war in Iraq was a big, fat mistake, all right?” Trump thundered when asked about his call for then-President George W. Bush to be impeached. “They lied. They said there were weapons of mass destruction. There were none, and they knew there were none.”

Trump added, “George Bush made the mistake. We can make mistakes, but that one was a beauty.”

NO POLITICIAN should get away with that. Not Trump. Not Bush Not BillyJeff clinton. Not even BHO when folks point at him as "rejecting Bush's war".

Because the LIES that were told were used by BOTH sides as justification for HORRENDOUS US mistakes and miscalculations. Mistakes that should NEVER be made again --- by either side or any US leadership.

And to fling this POO and get away with it -- would be a miscarraige of democratic debate.
Why don't you ring up W and have him come debate the lies with you in your thread?

 

[flacaltenn]

flacaltenn 13544341

I WAS PISSED OFF. This is one of the events that activated me politically. So I studied this awful series of mistakes in detail.. As a scientist/engineer -- I KNEW that the REAL weapons of mass destruction would be the THOUSANDS of IRAQI scientists/engineers that had to be working on all those evil schemes. And YET -- no one on the UN side could produce the evidence of that massive workforce.

What event activated you? In this thread Trump is talking about Bush43 lying about WMD and a ground invasion of Iraq March. Perhaps you can clarify what event activated you.

Anyone who was not prepared to drop the containment and stop using the same lies to justify it -- are just as guilty. Or do you not get that? What was Trump's position on containment? What was HIS solution? It's easy to criticize someone who acted to END a bad policy -- if you didn't have the balls to call out the lies -- stop the containment and FIX the initial problem.

What I meant about Republicans being too dumb to defend removing Saddam is ----

What JEB should have done is -- is look him in the face and ASK why for 12 years we were bombing Iraq daily and starving and killing people there????

How much LONGER did he want to continue to kill 100s of thousands of elderly and children for lack of medicine???

And what he would have done about the EU partners ABANDONING the "containment" crazy train???

After Trump picked his ego up from the floor -- Jeb would have won that round. With no lies, no partisan BS, and separated himself from his "lying brother" and told Americans the TRUE tough choices that had to be made at the time.

But like the OP -- he's not qualified to make the hard decisions because Jebulon has obviously not considered what HE would have done. What mistakes HE would have avoided. And THAT'S why neither of the morons should be even attempting to run for Prez.

 

[SmokeALib]

Saddam was a terrorist who slaughtered over half million of his own people. He would still be at it, or worse, if Bush hadn't taken him out. And here I thought you leftists were a compassionate bunch.

 

[flacaltenn]

Saddam was a terrorist who slaughtered over half million of his own people. He would still be at it, or worse, if Bush hadn't taken him out. And here I thought you leftists were a compassionate bunch.

That 1/2 million includes military casualties from the Iran war and the Kuwait war. You take those out and our policy of containment and bombing killed FAR more than that.

 

[SmokeALib]

Saddam was a terrorist who slaughtered over half million of his own people. He would still be at it, or worse, if Bush hadn't taken him out. And here I thought you leftists were a compassionate bunch.

That 1/2 million includes military casualties from the Iran war and the Kuwait war. You take those out and our policy of containment and bombing killed FAR more than that.

Incorrect. He slaughtered half a million Iraqis, including a couple hundred thousand Kurds, and another 300 thousand during the rebellion of 91. AND, another 300 thousand in Iran war. So, just for shits, we'll call it a cool million, give or take...

 

[Faun]

13534847That resolution passed in October 2002. Bush was not necessarily lying about WMD in October 2002. That is except the fact that he said he wanted to have the UNSC disarm Iraq PEACEFULLY.

That means because UN inspectors were not in Iraq in October 2002, there was justification to threaten war in order to get the inspectors back. Those were not lies to get Dem support for the authorization. Guess what? Saddam Hussen allowed the inspectors back in and the vast majority of nations by March 2003, wanted continued inspections not US invasion.

So the vote in October 2002 had nothing to do with Bush's LIE on March 17, 2003. That's when Bush committed the big WMD lie. (See my previous post)

The front runner in the GOP field knows Bush lied. Why don't you? The vote in October 2003 had nothing to do with Bush's WMD lie. Why try to defend him based on the October vote? He was not lying about WMD in Iraq then.

The GOP can't stop Trump from telling the truth about the Iraq invasion. Your storyline blaming Dems five months before Bush decided to invade doesn't work anymore. Bush lied, peopled died. Trump is right, you are wrong.

If Bush lied then so did both Clintons because they both said the exact same things at the exact same time.

I am not defending Bush, he screwed up, but you are trying to defend the dems who spoke the exact same "lies" at the exact same time.

My only point is that they all have blood on their hands. To put it all on Bush is just partisan bullshit.

Clinton didn't get 4,000+ American troops killed over it.

she voted to authorize and fund it, so yes, she is responsible, as they all are.

Nope...

"As president, I am responsible for the decision to go into Iraq." - George W. Bush, December, 2005

of course, he was CIC, he had to make the call. BUT, he could not have made that call unless congress (both parties) had authorized and funded it.

I never said that Bush is blameless, only that he is not the only one responsible.

Nope, Bush was the "decider." He decided to take the country to war. Had he decided not to take us to war, there would have been no war.

What you're suggesting is like blaming the police department for giving a cop a gun after he shoots someone.

 

[Faun]

Clinton didn't get 4,000+ American troops killed over it.

He would have had he been POTUS.

No, he wouldn't have since he wouldn't have launched a ground invasion into Iraq as Bush idiotically did.

How the fuck do you know that? you are one of the biggest morons on this forum.

Spits the idiot who I just busted lying on another thread. Seems you're still butthurt over that. LOL

And I know that because he was president for 8 years and never did when he had the chance, if that was what he wanted to do.

I never lie. You will never "bust" me. You are incompetent and do not have the mental abilities to even participate in a discussion with me.

Bullshit. You claimed there were Democrats who backed Schumer when he suggested Bush nominees be denied confirmation by the Senate.

You then couldn't name a single one.

You claim to know what was in Clinton's head, Bush's head, and Hillary's head. Is that because you want to give head to all of them?

More bullshit. I never said I knew what was in any of their heads. I said Clinton had 8 years to go to war with Iraq had that been the route he cared to take -- and he didn't.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Re: holier than thou on Iraq policy argument.

flacaltenn 13544369

But as I've also told you -- the 12 years of death and destruction that we had inflicted on IRAQ -- and that YOUR SIDE had no plan for fixing --- was based on those same damn lies.. What part of that don't you understand?

I understand that you have formed an opinion that was made after some event that you won't reveal. Your evidence that containment was based on lies is nothing but that. An opinion based on heresay. The NFZs were effective in saving lives - specifically the Kurds and that was part of containment.

Your 'containment was all lies' argument still does not forgive Bush for lying in order to start a ground invasion and occupation of Iraq. There is no relationship between containment and actual invasion that forced Bush to order a ground invasion. He should have let the inspections continue as both Clinton's stated publically during the weeks before the invasion.

Your holier than thou 'containment was all lies' argument shows you have little respect or concern for international law and the purpose of the United Nations. You have not studied the entire situation very well regarding Iraq since SH SURRENDERED to an international coalition and signed a ceasefire agreement agreeing to UN inspections as one condition of his surrender.

No one knows what Saddam Hussein would have done if he was not contained for a full decade before he finally decided to allow inspections for real in December 2002 under the threat of war if he didn't.

Give us an explanation as to why the Clinton's public position in March 2003 that I just posted against the war in favor of completing the diplomatic inspection process makes no difference in the odd conclusion you have saddled upon your mind.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

SmokeALib 13544846

Saddam was a terrorist who slaughtered over half million of his own people. He would still be at it, or worse, if Bush hadn't taken him out. And here I thought you leftists were a compassionate bunch.

Bush didn't lie by telling us that SH in 2002 was slaughtering his own people so US troops needed to go in. If SH was actually slaughtering his own, committing genocide, in 2001 or 2002 and it needed to be stopped, I would have approved it. That's not why he said he had to invade. He lied about WMD. Trump is correct on that one.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Re: holier than thou on Iraq policy argument.

flacaltenn 13544804

Anyone who was not prepared to drop the containment and stop using the same lies to justify it -- are just as guilty.

How did you arrive at that conclusion? How did a decade of US containment policy cause or coerce Bush to lie to the entire world about hidden WMD on the eve of starting a full scale bombing and ground invasion into Iraq in March 2003?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Saddam was a terrorist who slaughtered over half million of his own people. He would still be at it, or worse, if Bush hadn't taken him out. And here I thought you leftists were a compassionate bunch.

That 1/2 million includes military casualties from the Iran war and the Kuwait war. You take those out and our policy of containment and bombing killed FAR more than that.

Incorrect. He slaughtered half a million Iraqis, including a couple hundred thousand Kurds, and another 300 thousand during the rebellion of 91. AND, another 300 thousand in Iran war. So, just for shits, we'll call it a cool million, give or take...

I'm not sure why this is even being debated.

Bush did not go into Iraq to save the Iraqi people from Saddam Hussein. Had this been Bush's policy, then he'd have invade other countries with evil dictators that like to kill their own people. He didn't. Simple as.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Redfish 13540759

. of course, he was CIC, he had to make the call. BUT, he could not have made that call unless congress (both parties) had authorized and funded it. .

He did not have to make the call to invade Iraq. He could have made the call that both Clinton's were making before the invasion. Let the inspectors finish their job. There was no threat from Iraq with 200 UN inspectors on the ground in Iraq achieving very good results by March 2003. More myth. Bush never 'had' to make that call.

Your second problem is that Bush was originally hell bent on invading Iraq based on Cheney's agenda until September 2002. Cheney's agenda was 'to hell with that UN crap, Iraq can be invaded based on the standing war on terror AUMF that was passed immediately following the 9/11/01 attacks. Bush and Blair had been bombing the crap out of Iraq during the summer of 2002 hoping for a confrontation to justify an invasion. War was already highly escalated long before the Iraq AUMF.

But Bush had a self-inflicted problem. He wanted his Poodle to stand with him when the time for invasion arrived. Trouble was, the UK Parliament would not going along with an invasion based on a U.S. Authorization for military action anywhere in the world where terrorists might be hiding. Blair needed the UN to sanction an invasion. WMD was the only angle that could be played.

Cheney was pissed. Bush choose to send Powell to the UN and Bush started claiming he wanted to disarm Iraq peacefully through the UN and avoid war. His September 2002 conversion to peacenik is the only way he could get DEMs to grant a specific AUMF for Iraq in order to 'keep the peace' is what he said.

He convinced many Dems that war could be avoided by a show of bipartisan will that Iraq needed to resume inspections and cooperate or face war.

So you are absolutely wrong to state that Bush could not have made the call to invade Iraq unless Congress (both parties) had authorized it.

The War Powers act funds a war for at least 90 days. And fool Bush did not think removing SH from power would take that long.

 

[flacaltenn]

Saddam was a terrorist who slaughtered over half million of his own people. He would still be at it, or worse, if Bush hadn't taken him out. And here I thought you leftists were a compassionate bunch.

That 1/2 million includes military casualties from the Iran war and the Kuwait war. You take those out and our policy of containment and bombing killed FAR more than that.

Incorrect. He slaughtered half a million Iraqis, including a couple hundred thousand Kurds, and another 300 thousand during the rebellion of 91. AND, another 300 thousand in Iran war. So, just for shits, we'll call it a cool million, give or take...

Youre double counting and using propaganda.. And military war casualties don't count.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/05/world/05iht-saddam.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

Published: Wednesday, April 5, 2006

• BAGHDAD — The special Iraqi court that is trying Saddam Hussein announced Tuesday that it had charged the ex-president with genocide for attempting to annihilate the Kurdish race through military operations in 1988 that killed at least 50,000 civilians and destroyed thousands of villages.

The case is the first against Hussein to address the large-scale human rights violations committed during his decades in power, the same crimes the Bush administration has been publicizing to justify its costly invasion of Iraq. Six other defendants also face charges. Hussein is already being tried for the torture and killings of 148 men and boys in the Shiite village of Dujail.

But they acknowledge that the Anfal massacres and the suppression of the Shiite uprising of 1991, which resulted in up to 150,000 deaths, are the two cases that go much more directly to the heart of Hussein's rule, and could prove more cathartic for the vast majority of Iraqis.

Kurdish officials often say that 180,000 were killed in the Anfal campaign, but the actual number is closer to 80,000, according to Joost Hiltermann, the Middle East director of the International Crisis Group, who is writing a book on the Kurds. The scope of the trial is generally limited to the eight military operations from February to late August 1988, but will also examine evidence starting from March 1987, when Hussein appointed Majid the senior official in the north and gave him complete powers to quash the Kurdish militias and suppress any uprising.

I'll give you 200,000 just to end this off-topic excursion -- but the US containment CONSERVATIVELY beats that by about 100,000... The most accurate numbers on this are what the IRAQIs themselves used in the Saddam Hussein trial and could back up with legal evidence.. Not speculation or propaganda..