g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 125,228
- 68,944
^
And here is one of those rubes who bought into the WMDs story that Trump says is a total lie made up by Bush.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
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.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Trump Just Walked Back His Statement About Bush and Iraq
- Thread starter OKTexas
- Start date
And here is one of those rubes who bought into the WMDs story that Trump says is a total lie made up by Bush.
- Mar 23, 2013
- 29,838
- 16,699
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 125,228
- 68,944
No he hasn't.So in hindsight Trump has changed his mind about Iraq war...and?
The rubes are doing all sorts of mental leaps and twists to accommodate themselves to the fact that Trump has always been a Bush hating, cut and run, Democrat and are groping for a way to still be in love with Trump without their heads exploding from cognitive dissonance.
Based on the tards' prior behavior, I have every confidence they will pull it off with a combination of willful blindness, stupidity, and repetitive piss drinking.
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 125,228
- 68,944
Pro-choice.
Pro socialized medicine.
Pro big government.
Anti-war.
Wanted Bush impeached.
Wanted to cut and run from Iraq.
Big contributor to the Clintons.
Wake up, tards. That's a list of qualities one only finds in a hardcore, far left liberal. This guy is practically a member of Code Pink!
You dumb fucks call other Republicans a RINO for MUCH, MUCH LESS reasons.
Hypocrites.
Pro socialized medicine.
Pro big government.
Anti-war.
Wanted Bush impeached.
Wanted to cut and run from Iraq.
Big contributor to the Clintons.
Wake up, tards. That's a list of qualities one only finds in a hardcore, far left liberal. This guy is practically a member of Code Pink!
You dumb fucks call other Republicans a RINO for MUCH, MUCH LESS reasons.
Hypocrites.
C_Clayton_Jones
Diamond Member
- Apr 28, 2011
- 77,291
- 37,288
Trump is a coward and a liar.
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 125,228
- 68,944
As are his supporters. And they are hypocrites of the highest rank.Trump is a coward and a liar.
easyt65
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2015
- 90,307
- 61,149
No he hasn't.So in hindsight Trump has changed his mind about Iraq war...and?
Oh, I see. You're right....only Hillary has done so.
easyt65
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2015
- 90,307
- 61,149
I love how the 'anonymous' properties of the internet make 'lions' of the biggest cowards among us.....Trump is a coward and a liar.
depotoo
Diamond Member
- Sep 9, 2012
- 40,718
- 13,425
I guess you feel Trump is lying, now?
That is total bullshit.Bull he did so much tap dancing you'd of thought he was auditioning for dancing with the stars. He stumbled around for 4-5 minutes.
You are a fucking liar.
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,767
Neoconservatism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Neoconservatism draws on several intellectual traditions. The students of political science Professor Leo Strauss (1899–1973) comprised one major group. Eugene Sheppard notes that, "Much scholarship tends to understand Strauss as an inspirational founder of American neoconservatism."[42] Strauss was a refugee from Nazi Germany who taught at the New School for Social Research in New York (1939–49) and the University of Chicago (1949–1958).[43]
Strauss asserted that "the crisis of the West consists in the West's having become uncertain of its purpose." His solution was a restoration of the vital ideas and faith that in the past had sustained the moral purpose of the West.[dubious – discuss] Classical Greek political philosophy and the Judeo-Christian heritage are the essentials of the Great Tradition in Strauss's work.[44] Strauss emphasized the spirit of the Greek classics, and West (1991) argues that for Strauss the American "Founding Fathers" were correct in their understanding of the classics in their principles of justice. For Strauss, political community is defined by convictions about justice and happiness rather than by sovereignty and force. He repudiated the philosophy of John Locke as a bridge to 20th-century historicism and nihilism, and defended liberal democracy as closer to the spirit of the classics than other modern regimes.[citation needed] For Strauss, the American awareness of ineradicable evil in human nature, and hence the need for morality, was a beneficial outgrowth of the premodern Western tradition.[45] O'Neill (2009) notes that Strauss wrote little about American topics but his students wrote a great deal, and that Strauss's influence caused his students to reject historicism and positivism. Instead they promoted a so-called Aristotelian perspective on America that produced a qualified defense of its liberal constitutionalism.[46] Strauss influenced Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, editor John Podhoretz, and military strategist Paul Wolfowitz.
The Truth about Leo Strauss: Political Philosophy and American Democracy by Catherine and Michael Zuckert, an excerpt
The Economist identifies Strauss as the latest in a long list of alleged "puppeteers" pulling the strings of President Bush. Jeet Heer in the Boston Globe informs us: "We live in a world increasingly shaped by Leo Strauss, who is 'the thinker of the moment' in Washington." In an article entitled "The Long Reach of Leo Strauss," William Pfaff assures us that "Strauss's followers are in charge of U.S. foreign policy." Even though he is among those who explicitly note Strauss's apparent remoteness from politics, James Atlas takes seriously the claim that the Iraq War "turns out to have been nothing less than a defense of Western Civilization—as interpreted by the late classicist and philosopher Leo Strauss." He cites certain "conspiracy theorists" who believe that "the Bush administration's foreign policy is entirely a Straussian creation." Although Atlas seems reluctant to endorse the view of these conspiracy theorists—which he nonetheless repeats without dissent—he does, in his own name, answer the question "who runs things?" as follows: "It wouldn't be too much of a stretch to answer: the intellectual heirs of Leo Strauss." As evidence in support of that answer, he points to the fact (or alleged fact) that "the Bush administration is rife with Straussians." The Le Monde writers identify Strauss as one of two "master thinkers," the "theoretical substratum" beneath the neoconservatives, who, they say, "have marginalized center or democratic center left intellectuals to occupy a predominant position where the ideas are forged that dominate the political landscape."
The Neocon Godfather - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com
Norton uses the telling example of Machiavelli to considerable effect: while Strauss himself described the author of The Prince as "a teacher of evil," neoconservative Straussians today, in their defense of and even enthusiasm for acts of despotism in the alleged service of a higher good, appear to embrace the Machiavellian idea of the morally autonomous state. Indeed when Straussians refer to the concept of "statesmanship," they very often have in mind a politician’s willingness, in pursuit of his objectives, to break with received morality or his own country’s traditional legal order.
This point is arguable, however, and Strauss may have been philosophically closer to the ideological clique that today bears his name than Norton is prepared to admit. Strauss, who opposed the idea of individual rights, maintained that neither the ancient world nor the Christian envisioned strict, absolute limits on state power. The statesman thus enjoyed a relatively wide latitude for the exercise of his prudential judgment. Norton herself points out that the Straussians’ almost cult-like admiration for Abraham Lincoln derives from the sixteenth president’s willingness to act outside the law: e.g., suspending habeas corpus, jailing dissidents, and suppressing free speech. "Lincoln," Norton writes, is for Straussians "the model of prudential leadership" (p. 130) — a concept that, at least in its fundamentals, can be traced to Strauss himself.
Particularly satisfying, at least to this reader, is Norton’s discussion, quite contrary to the misleading conventional wisdom, of the lack of conservatism among today’s Straussians:
Appeals to history and memory, the fear of losing old virtues, of failing to keep faith with the principles of an honored ancestry, came to seem curious and antiquated. In their place were the very appeals to universal, abstract principles, the very utopian projects that conservatives once disdained. Conservatives had once called for limits and restraint; now there were calls to daring and adventurism. Conservatives had once stood steadfastly for the Constitution and community, for loyalties born of experience and strengthened in a common life. Now there were global projects, and crusades (p. 174).
Neoconservatism draws on several intellectual traditions. The students of political science Professor Leo Strauss (1899–1973) comprised one major group. Eugene Sheppard notes that, "Much scholarship tends to understand Strauss as an inspirational founder of American neoconservatism."[42] Strauss was a refugee from Nazi Germany who taught at the New School for Social Research in New York (1939–49) and the University of Chicago (1949–1958).[43]
Strauss asserted that "the crisis of the West consists in the West's having become uncertain of its purpose." His solution was a restoration of the vital ideas and faith that in the past had sustained the moral purpose of the West.[dubious – discuss] Classical Greek political philosophy and the Judeo-Christian heritage are the essentials of the Great Tradition in Strauss's work.[44] Strauss emphasized the spirit of the Greek classics, and West (1991) argues that for Strauss the American "Founding Fathers" were correct in their understanding of the classics in their principles of justice. For Strauss, political community is defined by convictions about justice and happiness rather than by sovereignty and force. He repudiated the philosophy of John Locke as a bridge to 20th-century historicism and nihilism, and defended liberal democracy as closer to the spirit of the classics than other modern regimes.[citation needed] For Strauss, the American awareness of ineradicable evil in human nature, and hence the need for morality, was a beneficial outgrowth of the premodern Western tradition.[45] O'Neill (2009) notes that Strauss wrote little about American topics but his students wrote a great deal, and that Strauss's influence caused his students to reject historicism and positivism. Instead they promoted a so-called Aristotelian perspective on America that produced a qualified defense of its liberal constitutionalism.[46] Strauss influenced Weekly Standard editor William Kristol, editor John Podhoretz, and military strategist Paul Wolfowitz.
The Truth about Leo Strauss: Political Philosophy and American Democracy by Catherine and Michael Zuckert, an excerpt
The Economist identifies Strauss as the latest in a long list of alleged "puppeteers" pulling the strings of President Bush. Jeet Heer in the Boston Globe informs us: "We live in a world increasingly shaped by Leo Strauss, who is 'the thinker of the moment' in Washington." In an article entitled "The Long Reach of Leo Strauss," William Pfaff assures us that "Strauss's followers are in charge of U.S. foreign policy." Even though he is among those who explicitly note Strauss's apparent remoteness from politics, James Atlas takes seriously the claim that the Iraq War "turns out to have been nothing less than a defense of Western Civilization—as interpreted by the late classicist and philosopher Leo Strauss." He cites certain "conspiracy theorists" who believe that "the Bush administration's foreign policy is entirely a Straussian creation." Although Atlas seems reluctant to endorse the view of these conspiracy theorists—which he nonetheless repeats without dissent—he does, in his own name, answer the question "who runs things?" as follows: "It wouldn't be too much of a stretch to answer: the intellectual heirs of Leo Strauss." As evidence in support of that answer, he points to the fact (or alleged fact) that "the Bush administration is rife with Straussians." The Le Monde writers identify Strauss as one of two "master thinkers," the "theoretical substratum" beneath the neoconservatives, who, they say, "have marginalized center or democratic center left intellectuals to occupy a predominant position where the ideas are forged that dominate the political landscape."
The Neocon Godfather - LewRockwell LewRockwell.com
Norton uses the telling example of Machiavelli to considerable effect: while Strauss himself described the author of The Prince as "a teacher of evil," neoconservative Straussians today, in their defense of and even enthusiasm for acts of despotism in the alleged service of a higher good, appear to embrace the Machiavellian idea of the morally autonomous state. Indeed when Straussians refer to the concept of "statesmanship," they very often have in mind a politician’s willingness, in pursuit of his objectives, to break with received morality or his own country’s traditional legal order.
This point is arguable, however, and Strauss may have been philosophically closer to the ideological clique that today bears his name than Norton is prepared to admit. Strauss, who opposed the idea of individual rights, maintained that neither the ancient world nor the Christian envisioned strict, absolute limits on state power. The statesman thus enjoyed a relatively wide latitude for the exercise of his prudential judgment. Norton herself points out that the Straussians’ almost cult-like admiration for Abraham Lincoln derives from the sixteenth president’s willingness to act outside the law: e.g., suspending habeas corpus, jailing dissidents, and suppressing free speech. "Lincoln," Norton writes, is for Straussians "the model of prudential leadership" (p. 130) — a concept that, at least in its fundamentals, can be traced to Strauss himself.
Particularly satisfying, at least to this reader, is Norton’s discussion, quite contrary to the misleading conventional wisdom, of the lack of conservatism among today’s Straussians:
Appeals to history and memory, the fear of losing old virtues, of failing to keep faith with the principles of an honored ancestry, came to seem curious and antiquated. In their place were the very appeals to universal, abstract principles, the very utopian projects that conservatives once disdained. Conservatives had once called for limits and restraint; now there were calls to daring and adventurism. Conservatives had once stood steadfastly for the Constitution and community, for loyalties born of experience and strengthened in a common life. Now there were global projects, and crusades (p. 174).
Last edited:
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,767
I guess you feel Trump is lying, now?
That is total bullshit.Bull he did so much tap dancing you'd of thought he was auditioning for dancing with the stars. He stumbled around for 4-5 minutes.
You are a fucking liar.
Jesus! No, Trump simply changed his mind. Why is that so difficult for you to grasp? Nothing of 'changing ones mind' has anything to do with lying.
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,767
Lol, the defeated's retreat into sarcasm and refusing reciprocal answers.Yeah, yeah, yeah. "We have always been at war with eastasia".Lol, George W Bush is a neocon, and Trump is not a neocon.So there you have it.
1) Trump believed Bush was the worst President in the history of the US. He believed Bush deliberately lied about WMDs to get us into a war with Iraq.
2) Trump believed there were no WMDs in Iraq.
3) Trump believed the US should cut and run from Iraq.
4) Trump believed Bush should be impeached for lying to get us into the war.
This is the GOP front runner, suckers! Can you believe it!?! BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!
Your poor dumb bastards. You got yourselves into a real pickle. You have to either reject Trump, or reject everything you tards have professed for the past 7 years.
Which is it going to be? Hmmmm...
Neocons believe that it is important for leaders to use lies to govern, and Trump thinks that is bad for America.
While I wouldnt go so far as to say Bush should have been impeached, I do think he was one of the worst Presidents since WW2, and the lie that he kept us safe is just the epitome of what neocon leadership is all about.
And Trump I think has every right to his opinion, and while I disagree with some of it, I find that far more preferable to lying ass hats like Hillary, Rubio or Jeb!
Sure. I get it. Yeah.
Lol, loser.
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,767
No, the fact is that you cannot distinguish between what happens around you and what you prefer to have happen around you.I'm watching a town hall on CNN and Trump just refused to repeat his debate claim that Bush lied to get us into Iraq. He was given 3 opportunities to repeat his statement and wouldn't do it.
Your thoughts?
Trump made it clear that he believes the War in Iraq was a mistake and that the Bush Admin lied about the intelligence. He doesn't need to keep picking at the scab. That is just good politics.
Anyone who still believes that cover story about "imminent danger" and "mushroom clouds" from Iraq is either willfully ignorant or a blind partisan. We conservatives need to confront the demons of the "W" past and not be afraid to admit we were misled. Bush was a disaster. NEXT!!
This is about Trump not Bush, the fact is Trump backpedaled and softened his remarks.
JimBowie1958
Old Fogey
- Sep 25, 2011
- 63,590
- 16,767
Conservatives need to have the demon of neoconservativism exorcised.I'm watching a town hall on CNN and Trump just refused to repeat his debate claim that Bush lied to get us into Iraq. He was given 3 opportunities to repeat his statement and wouldn't do it.
Your thoughts?
Trump made it clear that he believes the War in Iraq was a mistake and that the Bush Admin lied about the intelligence. He doesn't need to keep picking at the scab. That is just good politics.
Anyone who still believes that cover story about "imminent danger" and "mushroom clouds" from Iraq is either willfully ignorant or a blind partisan. We conservatives need to confront the demons of the "W" past and not be afraid to admit we were misled. Bush was a disaster. NEXT!!
- Sep 13, 2012
- 65,665
- 20,687
- Thread starter
- #75
OK, now tell us what was on all those planes and trucks that went to Syria during the build up to the invasion.
It doesnt matter because Bush allowed it to happen. Had he truly wanted to cease WMDs he would not have announced such a long warning period and would have gone in with the surprise element behind him to grab those weapons. But he did not and instead gave Hussein plenty of time to remove what weapons he may have had. Doing that served the dual interest of protecting American and European corporations that had been violating the cease fire while also allowing him an excuse for not finding the massive stock piles of WMDs he knew was not there in the first place.
Bush is a neocon who thinks that lying to the public and his political supporters is an acceptable tool of state craft, and the invasion of Iraq is the epitome of his neocon values system.
Nice conspiracy theory.
Lol, it is not a conspiracy theory. These are facts of the public domain and if you were nt so stupid and lazy you would know that they are.
Curveball (informant) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Other than your one little rant about Blair you still haven't explained how all the other member states, of the coalition, were duped into joining Bush's conspiracy.
Theowl32
Diamond Member
- Dec 8, 2013
- 22,893
- 17,291
Did Boosh lie, or did he carry out the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs that clinton signed?Bush did make a big mistake and lied to America about the intel.It's on the record. What more can he say? Did he say Bush told the truth? Then he isn't walking anything back.
Actually he said Bush made a bad mistake.
But people in the Republican PArty dont want their noses rubbed in it 24/7.
I can understand that perhaps you want Trump to commit political suicide by hammering an irrelevant issue.
Jeb! aint gonna win, so why bother with his families legacy?
There is a distinction. Remember, Boosh was not the first to propagate existence of WMDs.
It was more than just clinton and Booooosh. Saddams son in laws along with UN security council also claiming he had them. All before Booooosh took office.
We also know the country's paradigm shifted on how to deal with terror sponsored nations that were enemies of this nation. No longer could we be reactive to posed threats. Look what 19 men did with out a gun. The democrats seemed to agree considering how they voted for the war, before they spoke out against it.
Just saying.
Last edited:
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 125,228
- 68,944
Did Boosh lie
Trump says so, and that Bush should be impeached for it.
It was more than just clinton and Booooosh.
Which one invaded Iraq?
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 125,228
- 68,944
Here's the link: Republican town hall: Donald Trump challenged over 9/11 - CNNPolitics.comI'm watching a town hall on CNN and Trump just refused to repeat his debate claim that Bush lied to get us into Iraq. He was given 3 opportunities to repeat his statement and wouldn't do it.
Your thoughts?
I saw Trump on MTP on Sunday, and he refused to repeat his claim on there, too. I was angry the host was not more aggressive with Trump and let him off the hook so easily.
g5000
Diamond Member
- Nov 26, 2011
- 125,228
- 68,944
I've linked to the interview from CNN where Trump plainly stated he was disappointed that Nancy Pelosi did not impeach Bush. He said an impeachment would have been "a wonderful thing". It's on the record for all time.
Watch Trump run like the chickenshit he is from that:
CHUCK TODD: I want to go to the debate last night. Your 2008 comments about George W. Bush were brought up, and this idea that you were surprised at the time that then Speaker Pelosi had ruled out impeachment. Did you believe that, and I just want to clarify this, did you believe that there was enough there to bring up impeachment proceedings against George W. Bush in 2008 over Iraq?
DONALD TRUMP: No, I was in the private sector, so I didn't think about it too much. But certainly, the war in Iraq was a disaster. No, not to be impeached, but the war in Iraq was a disa-- it was a mistake. He just made a mistake. We went into Iraq, we lost thousands of lives, we lost trillions of dollars, $2 trillion.
CHUCK TODD:You don't believe it's an impeachable offense now? You were implying that it might be in 2008.
DONALD TRUMP: Well, that's for other people to say.
No, dickface, you decided it was something for YOU to say at the time.
How the FUCK is this guy the GOP front runner?
Someone please explain.
Watch Trump run like the chickenshit he is from that:
CHUCK TODD: I want to go to the debate last night. Your 2008 comments about George W. Bush were brought up, and this idea that you were surprised at the time that then Speaker Pelosi had ruled out impeachment. Did you believe that, and I just want to clarify this, did you believe that there was enough there to bring up impeachment proceedings against George W. Bush in 2008 over Iraq?
DONALD TRUMP: No, I was in the private sector, so I didn't think about it too much. But certainly, the war in Iraq was a disaster. No, not to be impeached, but the war in Iraq was a disa-- it was a mistake. He just made a mistake. We went into Iraq, we lost thousands of lives, we lost trillions of dollars, $2 trillion.
CHUCK TODD:You don't believe it's an impeachable offense now? You were implying that it might be in 2008.
DONALD TRUMP: Well, that's for other people to say.
No, dickface, you decided it was something for YOU to say at the time.
How the FUCK is this guy the GOP front runner?
Someone please explain.
easyt65
Diamond Member
- Aug 4, 2015
- 90,307
- 61,149
Trump says so, and that Bush should be impeached for it. .
By all means, please go right ahead and begin Impeachment proceedings on President Bush.
WHO invaded Iraq? President Bush ordered it with the full support of and authorization from Hillary Clinton, John Kerry and others.
WHO took the country to war on his own, by-passing Congress to sue our military to help terrorists take over Libya? That WOULD be Obama and Hillary. Impeachment proceedings SHOULD begin against Obama for THAT.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 19
- Views
- 333
- Replies
- 44
- Views
- 316
- Replies
- 411
- Views
- 3K
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 69
- Views
- 334
- Replies
- 12
- Views
- 73
- Replies
- 173
- Views
- 1K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8487
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 481
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-