What President Bush Didn't Do!

[Jarhead]

Bush didn't do anything.
Maybe that was part of the problem.

if this is true, then why was he blamed for all that went wrong under his watch, and all that has gone wrong since then?

 

[Indeependent]

Bush didn't do anything.
Maybe that was part of the problem.

if this is true, then why was he blamed for all that went wrong under his watch, and all that has gone wrong since then?

What happens when irresponsible parents allow their children to do whatever they want?
Come on, a lack of direction has it's consequences.

 

[Jarhead]

What President Bush Didn't Do!

He did not apologize for a grievous mistake, costing lives, money and credibility.

yeah...

He should have followed Obama's lead..

"I didn't know about it"

 

[BlindBoo]

You Republicans can't change the reasons for going to war from "We know that Saddam Hussein has chemical and biological weapons that pose an imminent threat to America" to "Saddam Hussein was a bad guy."

The US supported Hussein's regime throughout the 1980s, and then have been bombing Iraqis since the 1990s.

the reason Congress of both sides of the aisle voted for and approved the military action in Iraq is because the intel of the US as well as the intel of many countries showed that Iraq was in breach of the treaty Hussein signed in 1992.

Try to debate honestly

That treaty was signed with the UNSC. The UNSC did not authorize the use of military force against Iraq prior to the US led invasion. Several countries on the SC refused to pass resolution 1441 when it contained language that would lead to the use of military force.

 

[Jarhead]

You Republicans can't change the reasons for going to war from "We know that Saddam Hussein has chemical and biological weapons that pose an imminent threat to America" to "Saddam Hussein was a bad guy."

The US supported Hussein's regime throughout the 1980s, and then have been bombing Iraqis since the 1990s.

the reason Congress of both sides of the aisle voted for and approved the military action in Iraq is because the intel of the US as well as the intel of many countries showed that Iraq was in breach of the treaty Hussein signed in 1992.

Try to debate honestly

That treaty was signed with the UNSC. The UNSC did not authorize the use of military force against Iraq prior to the US led invasion. Several countries on the SC refused to pass resolution 1441 when it contained language that would lead to the use of military force.

true..

Yet congress, in a bipartisan vote, opted to do what they believed was in the best interest of the region.

 

[BlindBoo]

The "intel" was from a CIA informant named Rafid Ahmed Aiwan al-Janabi, codenamed "Curveball" who has admitted that he lied about everything.
https://www.google.com/search?q=al-janabi+curveball&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a

The war was a lie from the start.
https://www.google.com/search?q=no+wmd+in+iraq&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a

Obviously the intel was wrong.....but it doesn't change the fact that the intel was confirmed by intel agencies all over the world.

Get off it guy. You are making yourself look silly.

Even the CIA warned Bush that there was credible evidence that Iraq had no active WMD program or stockpiles.

 

[KNB]

Who the fuck is the US Congress to decide what is best for Iraq? Especially after selling chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein?

 

[Indeependent]

the reason Congress of both sides of the aisle voted for and approved the military action in Iraq is because the intel of the US as well as the intel of many countries showed that Iraq was in breach of the treaty Hussein signed in 1992.

Try to debate honestly

That treaty was signed with the UNSC. The UNSC did not authorize the use of military force against Iraq prior to the US led invasion. Several countries on the SC refused to pass resolution 1441 when it contained language that would lead to the use of military force.

true..

Yet congress, in a bipartisan vote, opted to do what they believed was in the best interest of the region.

Boost their Stock Portfolios,

 

[Camp]

Bush didn't do anything.
Maybe that was part of the problem.

if this is true, then why was he blamed for all that went wrong under his watch, and all that has gone wrong since then?

Because it was his job to know what the fuck was going on, examine and give scholarly attention to issue's, particularly military issue's, and determine strategies to resolve problems and issue's. He didn't do that. He took the lazy and irrisponsible method of letting others determine the fate of the nation and the troops under his command.
Example, he didn't listen to military advisors who told him hundreds of thousands of troops would be needed after the Iraq army was defeated. They would be needed to occupy and keep control of the country. He ignored them and instead let Rumsfield and Cheney have their way. Highly trained conventional troops were thus used as occupation troops without training or being properly equiped. That meant troops that should have had armored verhicals and body armor to protect them from snipers and IED's were needlessly and wastefully sacrificed as parents of troops held bake sales to raise funds to purchase body armor for the their kids under Bush's orders and command and troops in the field had to rumage through military dumps to find steel which could be used as sub standard armor for their unarmored vehicals. Only the embarrassment of the publicity of parents holding these bake sales and a soldier questioning Rumsfield during a press conference in Iraq brought an eventual resolution of sorts to these disgraceful situations.
Bush didn't fullfill his obligation to protect his troops to the best of his ability.

 

[BlindBoo]

the reason Congress of both sides of the aisle voted for and approved the military action in Iraq is because the intel of the US as well as the intel of many countries showed that Iraq was in breach of the treaty Hussein signed in 1992.

Try to debate honestly

That treaty was signed with the UNSC. The UNSC did not authorize the use of military force against Iraq prior to the US led invasion. Several countries on the SC refused to pass resolution 1441 when it contained language that would lead to the use of military force.

true..

Yet congress, in a bipartisan vote, opted to do what they believed was in the best interest of the region.

President Bush withheld information from Congress that the CIA had told him Iraq did not have WMD. But as I think you might remember, I think most of the Democrats who voted in favor of that invasion are hawks anyway. They wanted the war. Not much different than the Republicans in regards to our Foreign policy in the region.

 

[longknife]

Why am I not surprised at the vitriolic responses against President Bush?

 

[Sallow]

How long should US soldiers occupy a country that didn't attack us on 9/11?

it was not an issue of occupy.

Intel of many countries gave us reason to believe that Iraq was in breach of the treaty and therefore a threat to sovereign nations in the region.

You may be too young to recall how Iraq went into Kuwait and pretty much took the country over in a matter of hours.

Hussein was an issue.....it was what it was.

You seem to forget that Saddam Hussein asked the United States permission to do so. And received it from American Diplomat, April Glaspie.

 

[bendog]

How long should US soldiers occupy a country that didn't attack us on 9/11?

it was not an issue of occupy.

Intel of many countries gave us reason to believe that Iraq was in breach of the treaty and therefore a threat to sovereign nations in the region.

You may be too young to recall how Iraq went into Kuwait and pretty much took the country over in a matter of hours.

Hussein was an issue.....it was what it was.

You seem to forget that Saddam Hussein asked the United States permission to do so. And received it from American Diplomat, April Glaspie.

Well, more so she didn't raise an objection. Still, Kuwait was stealing Iraq's oil.

 

[BlindBoo]

Why am I not surprised at the vitriolic responses against President Bush?

Look at the title of the thread coupled with the pathetic nature of the cartoon posted......But I'm sure you get the conspiracy nuts votes.

 

[BlindBoo]

it was not an issue of occupy.

Intel of many countries gave us reason to believe that Iraq was in breach of the treaty and therefore a threat to sovereign nations in the region.

You may be too young to recall how Iraq went into Kuwait and pretty much took the country over in a matter of hours.

Hussein was an issue.....it was what it was.

You seem to forget that Saddam Hussein asked the United States permission to do so. And received it from American Diplomat, April Glaspie.

Well, more so she didn't raise an objection. Still, Kuwait was stealing Iraq's oil.

And had driven the price of oil way down too.

 

[Jarhead]

Who the fuck is the US Congress to decide what is best for Iraq? Especially after selling chemical weapons to Saddam Hussein?

Pay attention....

I said "what was best for the region".....we have allies in the region

 

[ron4342]

And?

None of these things were done by Obama, either.

But here's one really important thing left off the Bush "didn't do list".

He didn't get Osama Bin Laden.

That was President Obama.

No he didn't. SEALs did.

Following the orders of Bush and then Obama, many different agencies left no stone unturned and finally located FOR SURE his whereabouts.

I do not believe there were any changes initiated by Obama as it pertained to finding Bin Laden.

Your analysis of the hunt for bin Laden is in error. The truth is that Alec Station, the CIA group tasked with finding bin Laden, was shut down by george w. bush in late 2005. Simply put, bush gave up the hunt. Soon after Obama came to office he reinstated Alec Station. When Alec Station succeeded in finding bin Laden it was Obama who gave the orders that led to the Seals killing bin Laden. bush had nothing to do with finding bin Laden or with giving the orders that released the Seals.
Oh, and for all those brain dead wingers, Seals do not act until they receive orders to do so. They receive those orders from their officers who in turn receive orders from their bosses. THAT chain command goes all the way up to the Commander in Chief who was President Obama at the time bin Laden was killed. Obama may not have physically killed bin Laden but he was the one who gave the go ahead which led directly to bin Laden's death.


C.I.A. Closes Unit Focused on Capture of bin Laden


By MARK MAZZETTI
Published: July 4, 2006
WASHINGTON, July 3 — The Central Intelligence Agency has closed a unit that for a decade had the mission of hunting Osama bin Laden and his top lieutenants, intelligence officials confirmed Monday. The unit, known as Alec Station, was disbanded late last year and its analysts reassigned within the C.I.A. Counterterrorist Center, the officials said.




http://www.nytimes.com/2006/07/04/washington/04intel.html?_r=0

 

[ron4342]

Why am I not surprised at the vitriolic responses against President Bush?

You shouldn't be surprised at the responses against bush. The guy was an asshole who led America into a phony war that cost around 4,500 American lives. Simply put, he was a disaster. Defend him if you wish but don't expect anyone who knows their history of that period to join you.

 

[Jarhead]

Why am I not surprised at the vitriolic responses against President Bush?

You shouldn't be surprised at the responses against bush. The guy was an asshole who led America into a phony war that cost around 4,500 American lives. Simply put, he was a disaster. Defend him if you wish but don't expect anyone who knows their history of that period to join you.

Spoken by a man who claims to have "been a republican".....

Its old on here ron....too many like you say that crap but their ideology says otherwise.

Like you.