We Wouldn't Be In This Mess With Iran If

[Edgetho]

I don't do pork though Haven't ingested anything that has a mother since the 1970s.

No wait, there was that one time in a Hutterite colony where there was nothing to eat but beef. Sat in my gut like a bowling ball.

Human Beings are omnivores. Fact of life.

Vegetarians inevitably pay a price for their diet later in life.

Plus the fact (and this is real) they're no fun to be around because they fart a lot. As in, all the time.

Another fact of life.

 

[Pogo]

YOUR assertion that only Muslims call Christians "infidels" is dead wrong. The definition not only includes "not Christian" but I provided you a quote proving "infidel" was being used against Thomas Jefferson in 1790 or so by an admitted American. So just give it up; you lost.

As for the rest of it, you did not read what I offered you, did you? The Brits did not overtake and rule Iran per se, no. It wasn't like what they did in India, although that too started with business contracts, didn't it? That was why in my post I said "basically colonized" as in had an inordinate foreign influence on Iran's leadership and resources.
You just going to keep spouting the same shit over and over, I'm going to find someone better informed to talk to.
It's all pretty much petty details anyway. The fact is, Iran has a bug up their ass about the US and I'm not sure it matters a whole lot at this point if it is our fault or Iran's or God's, it is not a good attitude. I'll pull a Pogo and argue with you ALL DAY LONG about the usage of 'infidel' though, because I know how to use words and you don't get to call me stupid for using them correctly.

I did not day that only Muslims call Christians Infidels. You merely lack the intelligence necessary to understand what I DID say, which is that in this instance, the term could not apply to Iran because the oil developers were not motivated by religion .

If you wish to pull a Pogo by continuing to argue about matters of which you are manifestly ignorant while being utterly obtuse about points that are being made, be my guest.

Gee Wally, I'm not sure I've ever been "pulled" before. Does it hurt?

Is it like pulled pork? Feel free to eat me.

View attachment 265975
You'll like it.

I don't do pork though Haven't ingested anything that has a mother since the 1970s.

No wait, there was that one time in a Hutterite colony where there was nothing to eat but beef. Sat in my gut like a bowling ball.

You never pulled taffy, Pogo? Geez you're making me feel ancient. Anyway, taffy has no mother.

I had no idea what that pic was. No, never did that, I've heard the term, never seen it.

Where I grew up a "taffy" was a candy on a stick, also called a "lollipop".
"Downa shore" there was also this local stuff you could buy at the beach called "salt water taffy" which was a stretchy flavored kind of thing.

 

[OldLady]

You authoritarian Regressives can cite lots of examples of the Iranians being called infidels by anybody even remotely associated with this issue, can you?

I will be waiting for your citations with baited breath.

It's okay, Dog. We learn most of our vocabulary by hearing it in context, and since big words like 'infidel' only get used in InfoWars videos and Limbaugh Hour, I understand your confusion. But there is a whole 'nother world of usage for the word. Here I am just trying, in a friendly way, to expand your knowledge base so you don't sound like quite such a stupid white cracker.

 

[Pogo]

Pretty convenient you have sidestepped the bullshit by the CURRENT president, though, huh?
Can't bring yourself to talk about what he's up to at the moment, can you?

The guy decided against bombing a sovereign nation because the loss of life wouldn't have fit the crime. Normally the left would be ecstatic about the fact that a president chose not to bomb brown people but they can't even muster up the little bit of appreciation that it would take because god forbid we agreed with anything trump did. I was extremely appreciative that Obama was able to go 8 years without starting a war with Iran. The thought of another major conflict over there makes me sick. Not one more of our men or women should have to die for that stupid shit going on over there. Why cant you be appreciative too?

Do you walk down the street thanking strangers for not punching you in the face?

Think about it.

Fucking stupid. Come when you got something that makes any fucking sense

You need clues for this? OK.

Your entire premise above assumes it's a given that we're supposed to attack Iran over a fucking drone. IT ISN'T.

The surprise in Rump's self-serving dance move was not that he pulled back. It was that there was an operation to pull back FROM.

Get it now?

No. I don't get how anyone could find fault in a president not bombing someone. You people are insane.

How arrogant is it to go "Hey Canada, good news. We've decided not to bomb you this week. Grovel before us".



This just in --- not-bombing is the NORMAL state of affairs.

 

[Pogo]

You authoritarian Regressives can cite lots of examples of the Iranians being called infidels by anybody even remotely associated with this issue, can you?

I will be waiting for your citations with baited breath.

It's okay, Dog. We learn most of our vocabulary by hearing it in context, and since big words like 'infidel' only get used in InfoWars videos and Limbaugh Hour, I understand your confusion. But there is a whole 'nother world of usage for the word. Here I am just trying, in a friendly way, to expand your knowledge base so you don't sound like quite such a stupid white cracker.

He's also misspelled the word bated.

You'd think a master bater would... well never mind.

 

[Pogo]

I don't do pork though Haven't ingested anything that has a mother since the 1970s.

No wait, there was that one time in a Hutterite colony where there was nothing to eat but beef. Sat in my gut like a bowling ball.

Human Beings are omnivores. Fact of life.

Vegetarians inevitably pay a price for their diet later in life.

Plus the fact (and this is real) they're no fun to be around because they fart a lot. As in, all the time.

Another fact of life.

That's nice, dear. Go take it to the vegetarians.

Perhaps this is another version of the arrogant use of infidel/believer above, where the unwashed ass-sume somebody who doesn't eat beef or pork is therefore a "vegetarian", since cow and pig are the only entities in their tiny little minds that count as "meat".

 

[Paulie]

The guy decided against bombing a sovereign nation because the loss of life wouldn't have fit the crime. Normally the left would be ecstatic about the fact that a president chose not to bomb brown people but they can't even muster up the little bit of appreciation that it would take because god forbid we agreed with anything trump did. I was extremely appreciative that Obama was able to go 8 years without starting a war with Iran. The thought of another major conflict over there makes me sick. Not one more of our men or women should have to die for that stupid shit going on over there. Why cant you be appreciative too?

Do you walk down the street thanking strangers for not punching you in the face?

Think about it.

Fucking stupid. Come when you got something that makes any fucking sense

You need clues for this? OK.

Your entire premise above assumes it's a given that we're supposed to attack Iran over a fucking drone. IT ISN'T.

The surprise in Rump's self-serving dance move was not that he pulled back. It was that there was an operation to pull back FROM.

Get it now?

No. I don't get how anyone could find fault in a president not bombing someone. You people are insane.

How arrogant is it to go "Hey Canada, good news. We've decided not to bomb you this week. Grovel before us".



This just in --- not-bombing is the NORMAL state of affairs.

You think not bombing is what we normally do? Like I said you people are insane lol

 

[Edgetho]

You need clues for this? OK.

Your entire premise above assumes it's a given that we're supposed to attack Iran over a fucking drone. IT ISN'T.

The surprise in Rump's self-serving dance move was not that he pulled back. It was that there was an operation to pull back FROM.

Get it now?

IOW why was he ever teetering in the first place?

And you moronically assume Trump actually had an operation going.

He could have been sending a message to the woman-hating, boy-loving pedophiles in Iran.

Keep them on their toes.

Besides, I don't really want to attack Iran as much as I want to hurt them economically.

About the last thing we need over there is another War with Big Military Generals and their stupid Big Units with Big Toys making a mess of everything and pissing off the locals.

What we need to do is weaken Iran and then arm the resistance. If need be, we can send some advisers. It's what we should have done in Iraq.

We started off that way in Asscrackistan but it quickly turned into a Big War with Big Generals and Big Units making a mess of everything and pissing the locals off.

US Army Special Forces did in 100 days what the ENTIRE Soviet army couldn't do in ten years.

It isn't the President you have to worry about. It's the Big Generals commanding the Big Units. Especially the Marines and the Navy.

The Army Special Forces can handle it. Don't need a bunch of Conventional Unit buttheads getting in the way. They just end up being targets anyway.

We need to use Iran's stupidity against them. We attack them and the Iranian People will defend the Assahollahs.

We need to help the Iranian People overthrow the Assahollahs.

 

[Esmeralda]

First off, if Jimmy The Peanut had never been president, Iran wouldn't have had the balls to attack and occupy our Embassy.

You can believe what you will, but that is fact. The coward Ford wasn't much better, but anybody with a pulse would have been better than that walking cadaver

Second, and more recently, we've got THE worst president in human history that completely abrogated his responsibilities as POTUS during Iran's Green revolution.

This piece of garbage goes around the MidEast talking shit about an 'Arab Spring' giving the people in that area false hope and then -- Like the cowardly dimocrap he is (and they all are) runs away when the time to act is upon him.

obama was, and still is, a craven coward. You just don't trust a craven coward. Especially a dimocrap craven coward. But.... That's just about all of them.

You ought to read this. It is not the last word on the subject, but it is somewhere to start for those few who are interested.

Why Obama Let Iran's Green Revolution Fail
The president wanted a nuclear deal, not regime change.

One of the great hypotheticals of Barack Obama's presidency involves the Iranian uprising that began on June 12, 2009, after Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was announced the winner of contested presidential elections. What if the president had done more to help the protesters when the regime appeared to be teetering?

Me: What hypotheticals? dimocraps aren't even aware of the Green Revolution. It's down the memory hole. A failing by a dimocrap scum president that shall not be talked about. These scum don't talk about anything not presented to them by the media.



It's well known he was slow to react. Obama publicly downplayed the prospect of real change at first, saying the candidates whom hundreds of thousands of Iranians were risking their lives to support did not represent fundamental change. When he finally did speak out, he couldn't bring himself to say the election was stolen: "The world is watching and inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was."



But Obama wasn't just reluctant to show solidarity in 2009, he feared the demonstrations would sabotage his secret outreach to Iran. In his new book, "The Iran Wars," Wall Street Journal reporter Jay Solomon uncovers new details on how far Obama went to avoid helping Iran's green movement. Behind the scenes, Obama overruled advisers who wanted to do what America had done at similar transitions from dictatorship to democracy, and signal America's support.



Solomon reports that Obama ordered the CIA to sever contacts it had with the green movement's supporters. "The Agency has contingency plans for supporting democratic uprisings anywhere in the world. This includes providing dissidents with communications, money, and in extreme cases even arms," Solomon writes. "But in this case the White House ordered it to stand down."

more at the link

This is why you just don't give power to dimocrap scum, people. They screw up everything they touch. Look what The Rapist did by not allowing our people to take out Usama bin Floatin'

Edgetho >>>>

 

[Pogo]

You need clues for this? OK.

Your entire premise above assumes it's a given that we're supposed to attack Iran over a fucking drone. IT ISN'T.

The surprise in Rump's self-serving dance move was not that he pulled back. It was that there was an operation to pull back FROM.

Get it now?

IOW why was he ever teetering in the first place?

And you moronically assume Trump actually had an operation going.

He could have been sending a message to the woman-hating, boy-loving pedophiles in Iran.

You're saying Rump is a liar? Won't get an argument there.

Keep them on their toes.

Besides, I don't really want to attack Iran as much as I want to hurt them economically.

About the last thing we need over there is another War with Big Military Generals and their stupid Big Units with Big Toys making a mess of everything and pissing off the locals.

What we need to do is weaken Iran and then arm the resistance. If need be, we can send some advisers. It's what we should have done in Iraq.

We started off that way in Asscrackistan but it quickly turned into a Big War with Big Generals and Big Units making a mess of everything and pissing the locals off.

US Army Special Forces did in 100 days what the ENTIRE Soviet army couldn't do in ten years.

It isn't the President you have to worry about. It's the Big Generals commanding the Big Units. Especially the Marines and the Navy.

The Army Special Forces can handle it. Don't need a bunch of Conventional Unit buttheads getting in the way. They just end up being targets anyway.

We need to use Iran's stupidity against them. We attack them and the Iranian People will defend the Assahollahs.

We need to help the Iranian People overthrow the Assahollahs.

Yep. John Bolton's gotta go.

And as noted before, Rump has to quit hiring people on the basis of "I've seen this guy on TV".

 

[Edgetho]

That's nice, dear. Go take it to the vegetarians.

Perhaps this is another version of the arrogant use of infidel/believer above, where the unwashed ass-sume somebody who doesn't eat beef or pork is therefore a "vegetarian", since cow and pig are the only entities in their tiny little minds that count as "meat".

I sit corrected

 

[OldLady]

You authoritarian Regressives can cite lots of examples of the Iranians being called infidels by anybody even remotely associated with this issue, can you?

I will be waiting for your citations with baited breath.

It's okay, Dog. We learn most of our vocabulary by hearing it in context, and since big words like 'infidel' only get used in InfoWars videos and Limbaugh Hour, I understand your confusion. But there is a whole 'nother world of usage for the word. Here I am just trying, in a friendly way, to expand your knowledge base so you don't sound like quite such a stupid white cracker.

He's also misspelled the word bated.

You'd think a master bater would... well never mind.

Luv puns

 

[Edgetho]

You're saying Rump is a liar? Won't get an argument there.

The first casualty of war is The Truth.

shocking, huh??

 

[Pogo]

You authoritarian Regressives can cite lots of examples of the Iranians being called infidels by anybody even remotely associated with this issue, can you?

I will be waiting for your citations with baited breath.

It's okay, Dog. We learn most of our vocabulary by hearing it in context, and since big words like 'infidel' only get used in InfoWars videos and Limbaugh Hour, I understand your confusion. But there is a whole 'nother world of usage for the word. Here I am just trying, in a friendly way, to expand your knowledge base so you don't sound like quite such a stupid white cracker.

He's also misspelled the word bated.

You'd think a master bater would... well never mind.

Luv puns

Me two. But I don't think he was making one.

 

[Pogo]

First off, if Jimmy The Peanut had never been president, Iran wouldn't have had the balls to attack and occupy our Embassy.

You can believe what you will, but that is fact. The coward Ford wasn't much better, but anybody with a pulse would have been better than that walking cadaver

Second, and more recently, we've got THE worst president in human history that completely abrogated his responsibilities as POTUS during Iran's Green revolution.

This piece of garbage goes around the MidEast talking shit about an 'Arab Spring' giving the people in that area false hope and then -- Like the cowardly dimocrap he is (and they all are) runs away when the time to act is upon him.

obama was, and still is, a craven coward. You just don't trust a craven coward. Especially a dimocrap craven coward. But.... That's just about all of them.

You ought to read this. It is not the last word on the subject, but it is somewhere to start for those few who are interested.

Why Obama Let Iran's Green Revolution Fail
The president wanted a nuclear deal, not regime change.

One of the great hypotheticals of Barack Obama's presidency involves the Iranian uprising that began on June 12, 2009, after Mahmoud Ahmadinejad was announced the winner of contested presidential elections. What if the president had done more to help the protesters when the regime appeared to be teetering?

Me: What hypotheticals? dimocraps aren't even aware of the Green Revolution. It's down the memory hole. A failing by a dimocrap scum president that shall not be talked about. These scum don't talk about anything not presented to them by the media.



It's well known he was slow to react. Obama publicly downplayed the prospect of real change at first, saying the candidates whom hundreds of thousands of Iranians were risking their lives to support did not represent fundamental change. When he finally did speak out, he couldn't bring himself to say the election was stolen: "The world is watching and inspired by their participation, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the election was."



But Obama wasn't just reluctant to show solidarity in 2009, he feared the demonstrations would sabotage his secret outreach to Iran. In his new book, "The Iran Wars," Wall Street Journal reporter Jay Solomon uncovers new details on how far Obama went to avoid helping Iran's green movement. Behind the scenes, Obama overruled advisers who wanted to do what America had done at similar transitions from dictatorship to democracy, and signal America's support.



Solomon reports that Obama ordered the CIA to sever contacts it had with the green movement's supporters. "The Agency has contingency plans for supporting democratic uprisings anywhere in the world. This includes providing dissidents with communications, money, and in extreme cases even arms," Solomon writes. "But in this case the White House ordered it to stand down."

more at the link

This is why you just don't give power to dimocrap scum, people. They screw up everything they touch. Look what The Rapist did by not allowing our people to take out Usama bin Floatin'

Edgetho >>>>View attachment 265981

Esmie, where you bin??

Tried to PM you, can't do it.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Markle, post: 2258489

You're joking right? You pick part of one of the numerous examples I provide and, I guess, you think that means none of them exist?

Since you didn’t post Clinton’s entire 2002 speech to include her demands for resumed inspections my point stands for all the other 2002 quotes you provided since Senator
Clinton did not support the invasion after the inspections were working and neither did any other of the Democrats on you list.

So I’m not joking - you have presented a lie.

Just for the record I have always agreed with Bush’s decision to request the AUMF IN 2002 in order to force Saddam Hussein to resume inspections or face war.

Hillary was right in 2002 to vote with Bush.

But when inspections were in place and working it is there where Bush lied us into war as TrumpO says.

Cle by one position in 2003 was for Bush to allow the inspections to continue and avoid war.

That is where I separate from Bush and agree with Clinton and all the other Dems.

 

[beautress]

We Wouldn't be in this mess if the Idiot In Chief hadn't let Bolton talk him into pulling out of the Iran Nuke agreement.

You'll recall that issue was why General Mattis quit

Oh? A few FBI Democrats are quitting, too. They just don't know it yet.

 

[rightwinger]

Trump has zero international diplomacy skills

 

[Markle]

Since you didn’t post Clinton’s entire 2002 speech to include her demands for resumed inspections my point stands for all the other 2002 quotes you provided since Senator
Clinton did not support the invasion after the inspections were working and neither did any other of the Democrats on you list.

So I’m not joking - you have presented a lie.

Just for the record I have always agreed with Bush’s decision to request the AUMF IN 2002 in order to force Saddam Hussein to resume inspections or face war.

Hillary was right in 2002 to vote with Bush.

But when inspections were in place and working it is there where Bush lied us into war as TrumpO says.

Cle by one position in 2003 was for Bush to allow the inspections to continue and avoid war.

That is where I separate from Bush and agree with Clinton and all the other Dems.

Once again for your reference.

"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow."
- President Clinton in 1998 “

[…], when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world", and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.”
- President Clinton , Jan. 27, 1998 – State of the Union

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 .

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

“Earlier today, I ordered America’s armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraqis nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors.”

“Their purpose is to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world.”

“Saddam Hussein must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons.”

- President Bill Clinton, Dec. 16, 1998

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 Clinton Secretary of State

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed."
- Madeline Albright, 1998 Clinton Secretary of State

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 "

Update: September 8, 2005 - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser was sentenced to community service and probation and fined $50,000 for illegally removing highly classified documents from the National Archives and intentionally destroying some of them..

[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 .

"As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 .

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies."
- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 .

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 .

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 .

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons but has not yet achieved nuclear capability."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002 .

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal."
- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction."
- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002 .

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003" (Currently President Barack Hussein Obama’s Secretary of State)

I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons...I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out."
- Clinton's Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003


"Saddam is gone and good riddance," former President Bill Clinton said yesterday, but he urged President Bush to resist trying to get even with nations that opposed the war.

"There are German and French soldiers in Afghanistan today. Does the President want them to come home?" Clinton said at a Manhattan forum on corporate integrity.

Democrats on Iraq + WMD's (Weapons of Mass Destruction)



He [President Clinton] praised Bush and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld for their handling of the war, but said Bush should have waited longer before attacking for the "chance that either [Saddam Hussein] would have disarmed or . . . we would have had far more members of the Security Council with us."

Clinton also said Bush should not be faulted if banned weapons of mass destruction aren't found.

"I don't think you can criticize the President for trying to act on the belief that they have a substantial amount of chemical and biological stock. . . . That is what I was always told," Clinton said.

- Former President Clinton Wednesday, April 16, 2003

"Could Be One of the Great Achievements of This Administration" The vice president said he’d been to Iraq 17 times and visits the country every three months or so. "I know every one of the major players in all the segments of that society" he said. "It's impressed me. I've been impressed how they have been deciding to use the political process rather than guns to settle their differences."

- Vice President Joe Biden (D) Feb. 10, 2010

How has the war President Barack Hussein Obama said we SHOULD have been fighting going? How is the Middle East going now that President Obama is President? Oh, Afghanistan just crossed 2,330 American fatalities. Seventy percent of whom died since President Obama took office.

 

[Pogo]

Trump has zero international diplomacy skills

Oh? He's improved then. 'Bout time.