When Everyone Agreed About Iraq

[editec]

I got rid of my NDSM on the plane ride immediately after boot camp. I gave it to some kid who was thrilled by it.

Gotta tell yas, I think it's a silly medal.

I suspect many of you who also recieved this honor feel likewise.

Of course we all had to wear at least the ribbon when in dress uniform.

 

[Mr. Shaman]

nice try at hair splitting, but FAIL.

because you SAY so? Are you suggesting that stating an opinion is the same thing as asserting a fact?

how the fuck do you libtards claim to know what was in Bush's mind when he said that the intel showed that saddam had WMDs?

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh....so....all-of-a-sudden, now...."conservatives" are ALSO gonna quit insisting THEY know what other people think??

Not likely.

As-far-as WMDs go....they were an afterthought, anyhow....AFTER the plans, to invade Iraq, were ALREADY BEING IMPLEMENTED!!!!


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3iGAxJ-liI]Hijacking Catastrophe - 2004 Interview with Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatkowski - YouTube[/ame]
*
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hWJuBAVpLoA]Lt Col Karen Kwiatkowski on 9/11 Iraq Propaganda Campaign - YouTube[/ame]​

 

[expatriate]

I got rid of my NDSM on the plane ride immediately after boot camp. I gave it to some kid who was thrilled by it.

Gotta tell yas, I think it's a silly medal.

I suspect many of you who also recieved this honor feel likewise.

Of course we all had to wear at least the ribbon when in dress uniform.

as a career naval officer, I had to wear full dress often, and medals were required. I will agree, however, that the NDSM was not that big of a deal. We used to refer to it as "alive in '75".

 

[Redfish]

Any democrat who stated with absolute certainty that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's was a liar, and I called them that at the time. NO democrat who voted for the use of force resolution ever got my vote until they publicly apologized for the error of that vote. And AGAIN... you all keep running from the fact that stating an opinion is not the same thing as asserting a fact. It really IS substantively different.
I think I smell smoke. RUN FOR YOUR LIVES! THERE IS NO DOUBT THE THEATER IS ON FIRE. two different things. one is an opinion, the other is a lie.

OK, they all lied because they all had an ulterior motive because they all love war---------thats what you are saying. Is that what you really believe?

don't put words in MY mouth... I certainly have not done that to you.

Bush overstated the case. He needed to seal the deal with the American people so he oversold it, and in the process, he lied to us. That's just a fact. THere always were doubts. To tell Americans that there were NONE, especially when he KNEW there were, was a lie.

its interesting that you have insight into Bush's mind and you know exactly what he was thinking. since you are a mind reader, do you also do card tricks and saw women in half?


But OK, fine if you choose to believe the left wing version of this and ignore the facts from the time, good, you go right ahead and subscribe to that historical fantasy.

if it helps you justify your bush-hate, do it. just don't fill up this forum with your bullshit

 

[Redfish]

Bush said THERE IS NO DOUBT. He didn't say, "I have no doubt...even though some folks in the intelligence business have some doubts, some of them think that Saddam may be all hat and no cattle, but I choose not to believe their assessments. I believe in my heart that Saddam has stockpiles of WMD's" He didn't say that. He ASSERTED as FACT that there was ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY about Saddam's WMD's, and I understand it is difficult for you to swallow, but that WAS a lie. There NEVER was absolute certainty. There NEVER was NO DOUBT. He knew of doubts when he stated there were none. THAT'S a LIE. Just deal with it.

again, you are quibling about the words, the FACT is that he, and many others, believed the intel that said there was a certainty that saddam had WMDs.

Do you think Clinton was lying when he said the exact same thing based on exactly the same intel? how about Kerry? were they lying too? yes or no.

SO... to avoid just admitting that Bush looked us in the eye and LIED to us about the absolute certainty of Saddam's WMD's, you call it "quibbling about the words". How droll.

Neither of the two democrats you listed ever said there was absolute certainty about Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's.

Bush, however, did. That was a lie, because he KNEW of doubts when he said there were none.

did the democrats and UN reps who said exactly the same thing based on exactly the same intel also KNOW there were doubts and still choose to lie about it?

you make more of a fool of yourself with each new post.

 

[expatriate]

OK, they all lied because they all had an ulterior motive because they all love war---------thats what you are saying. Is that what you really believe?

don't put words in MY mouth... I certainly have not done that to you.

Bush overstated the case. He needed to seal the deal with the American people so he oversold it, and in the process, he lied to us. That's just a fact. THere always were doubts. To tell Americans that there were NONE, especially when he KNEW there were, was a lie.

its interesting that you have insight into Bush's mind and you know exactly what he was thinking. since you are a mind reader, do you also do card tricks and saw women in half?


But OK, fine if you choose to believe the left wing version of this and ignore the facts from the time, good, you go right ahead and subscribe to that historical fantasy.

if it helps you justify your bush-hate, do it. just don't fill up this forum with your bullshit

stating "there is no doubt" when there was, in fact, plenty of doubts that were presented to him in intelligence assessments, is saying something he knew to be false when he said it. That is not a "left wing fantasy", it is merely understanding the english language. If doubt did, in fact, exist, and Bush told us that there was NO doubt, that was a lie. Why is it so hard for you to take his dick out of your mouth long enough to just admit that?

 

[expatriate]

again, you are quibling about the words, the FACT is that he, and many others, believed the intel that said there was a certainty that saddam had WMDs.

Do you think Clinton was lying when he said the exact same thing based on exactly the same intel? how about Kerry? were they lying too? yes or no.

SO... to avoid just admitting that Bush looked us in the eye and LIED to us about the absolute certainty of Saddam's WMD's, you call it "quibbling about the words". How droll.

Neither of the two democrats you listed ever said there was absolute certainty about Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's.

Bush, however, did. That was a lie, because he KNEW of doubts when he said there were none.

did the democrats and UN reps who said exactly the same thing based on exactly the same intel also KNOW there were doubts and still choose to lie about it?

you make more of a fool of yourself with each new post.

Like I said, only one democrat that I know of, Al Gore, had ever expressed absolute certainty about Saddam's WMD's. And I will never vote for him for anything because of that.

 

[Redfish]

don't put words in MY mouth... I certainly have not done that to you.

Bush overstated the case. He needed to seal the deal with the American people so he oversold it, and in the process, he lied to us. That's just a fact. THere always were doubts. To tell Americans that there were NONE, especially when he KNEW there were, was a lie.

its interesting that you have insight into Bush's mind and you know exactly what he was thinking. since you are a mind reader, do you also do card tricks and saw women in half?


But OK, fine if you choose to believe the left wing version of this and ignore the facts from the time, good, you go right ahead and subscribe to that historical fantasy.

if it helps you justify your bush-hate, do it. just don't fill up this forum with your bullshit

stating "there is no doubt" when there was, in fact, plenty of doubts that were presented to him in intelligence assessments, is saying something he knew to be false when he said it. That is not a "left wing fantasy", it is merely understanding the english language. If doubt did, in fact, exist, and Bush told us that there was NO doubt, that was a lie. Why is it so hard for you to take his dick out of your mouth long enough to just admit that?

if you would get obama's dick out of your ass long enough to see reality you might understand-------------how is it a lie to say "based on the intel available to us and the entire world, there is no doubt that saddam has WMDs".

wake up, the intel was bad, it was bad because clinton had castrated our intel services, but it was the best they had. No intel is ever 100% reliable.

 

[Redfish]

SO... to avoid just admitting that Bush looked us in the eye and LIED to us about the absolute certainty of Saddam's WMD's, you call it "quibbling about the words". How droll.

Neither of the two democrats you listed ever said there was absolute certainty about Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's.

Bush, however, did. That was a lie, because he KNEW of doubts when he said there were none.

did the democrats and UN reps who said exactly the same thing based on exactly the same intel also KNOW there were doubts and still choose to lie about it?

you make more of a fool of yourself with each new post.

Like I said, only one democrat that I know of, Al Gore, had ever expressed absolute certainty about Saddam's WMD's. And I will never vote for him for anything because of that.

both clintons said it, kerry said it, reid said it, schumer said it. it was a lot more than just the idiot gore.

 

[expatriate]

and I love it how the right always comes back with, "well the democrats lied too!" as if, somehow, that makes lying acceptable. NONE of the democrats who expressed their belief that Saddam had WMD's ever ordered our men into battle. And none, save Gore, ever expressed absolute certainty.

The buck stops at the oval office. The spilled blood is on the CinC's hands. The wasted treasure is HIS ultimate responsibility. Trying to pass that off as a bi-partisan effort after the fact is bullshit.

 

[expatriate]

its interesting that you have insight into Bush's mind and you know exactly what he was thinking. since you are a mind reader, do you also do card tricks and saw women in half?


But OK, fine if you choose to believe the left wing version of this and ignore the facts from the time, good, you go right ahead and subscribe to that historical fantasy.

if it helps you justify your bush-hate, do it. just don't fill up this forum with your bullshit

stating "there is no doubt" when there was, in fact, plenty of doubts that were presented to him in intelligence assessments, is saying something he knew to be false when he said it. That is not a "left wing fantasy", it is merely understanding the english language. If doubt did, in fact, exist, and Bush told us that there was NO doubt, that was a lie. Why is it so hard for you to take his dick out of your mouth long enough to just admit that?

if you would get obama's dick out of your ass long enough to see reality you might understand-------------how is it a lie to say "based on the intel available to us and the entire world, there is no doubt that saddam has WMDs".

wake up, the intel was bad, it was bad because clinton had castrated our intel services, but it was the best they had. No intel is ever 100% reliable.

How is it a lie? Because it IS a lie. There WAS doubt. He told America that there was NO DOUBT, when, in fact, there was. THAT was a lie. period.

 

[Misty]

The liberals, by and large, do NOT approve of your use of facts.

Liberals always rewrite history.

 

[Mac1958]

.

Only one person can order our troops to battle. Not the United Nations, not a funding approval by our Congress, not politicians from either party saying one thing or the other. No one can force that one person to keep the troops home or send them to war. The final decision belongs to that one person.

Just one person.

He made his decision.

.

 

[Misty]

If The Bush Administration Lied About WMD, So Did These People ? Version 3.0 | Right Wing News

“[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.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to refine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer- range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” — From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others"

 

[Misty]

.
Only one person can order our troops to battle. Not the United Nations, not a funding approval by our Congress, not politicians from either party saying one thing or the other. No one can force that one person to keep the troops home or send them to war. The final decision belongs to that one person.

Just one person.

He made his decision.

.

With overwhelming bipartisan approval from congress.

 

[Misty]

Including Obama's two secretaries of state. Clinton and Kerry.

 

[Mac1958]

.
Only one person can order our troops to battle. Not the United Nations, not a funding approval by our Congress, not politicians from either party saying one thing or the other. No one can force that one person to keep the troops home or send them to war. The final decision belongs to that one person.

Just one person.

He made his decision.

.

With overwhelming bipartisan approval from congress.

So we agree.

Just one person.

.

 

[U2Edge]

Clinton was a filthy god damned scum and ReagaNUT. It tickles me that haflwit America can't look past a label to see what Clinton actually did:

1. NAFTA
2. Wide open borders for cheap labor (h1b and illegal)
3. Wide open borders for cheap goods made by coerced labor
4. First no bid defense contract for Halliburton (bosnia)
5. First no bid defense contract for Blackwater (bosnia)
6. Forced Brooksley Born out at CFTC setting stage for crash of 2008
7. Preserved heroin route through Kosova
8. Signed repeal of Glass Steagall, part II setting stage for 2008
9. Signed CFTMA thereby guaranteeing a major economic calamity
10. Pardoned Marc Rich
11. Took his payoff as $80kk in speaking and consulting fees; never created a private sector job, never improved a process, never invented anything.

Clinton was a NeoCon playing a Democrat. The man belongs in prison.

Party politics is apparently some kind of mental defect in large numbers of Americans.

At least Clinton had it right in saying that Saddam was indeed a threat. The world is safer today without Saddam!

Saddam was threat inside Iraq. Who gives a fuck what happens inside Iraq?

Just you liberals. Only the most degenerate nutballs are lost enough to pretend to give a shit what happens to the people inside foreign hellholes.

Saddam invaded and attacked four different countries while he was in power and threaten the planets vital energy supplies with seizure and sabotage. Saddam's regime was the first since Hitler to invade and annex another country. Saddam's regime was the first to use Chemical weapons widely against a foreign country.

The sanctions and weapons embargo to contain Saddam had crumbled by 2002 so the means of containment were essentially gone. Without containment Saddam would be free to rebuild his military might both conventional and unconventional. At that point, regime change became a necessity. Saddam was removed in 2003 and the world isafer because of that action.

 

[NYcarbineer]

its interesting that you have insight into Bush's mind and you know exactly what he was thinking. since you are a mind reader, do you also do card tricks and saw women in half?


But OK, fine if you choose to believe the left wing version of this and ignore the facts from the time, good, you go right ahead and subscribe to that historical fantasy.

if it helps you justify your bush-hate, do it. just don't fill up this forum with your bullshit

stating "there is no doubt" when there was, in fact, plenty of doubts that were presented to him in intelligence assessments, is saying something he knew to be false when he said it. That is not a "left wing fantasy", it is merely understanding the english language. If doubt did, in fact, exist, and Bush told us that there was NO doubt, that was a lie. Why is it so hard for you to take his dick out of your mouth long enough to just admit that?

if you would get obama's dick out of your ass long enough to see reality you might understand-------------how is it a lie to say "based on the intel available to us and the entire world, there is no doubt that saddam has WMDs".

wake up, the intel was bad, it was bad because clinton had castrated our intel services, but it was the best they had. No intel is ever 100% reliable.

No intel is 100% reliable, therefore to claim no doubt, which requires 100% reliability, is a lie.

We were lied to in order to get us to support a disastrous policy.

 

[Misty]

.
Only one person can order our troops to battle. Not the United Nations, not a funding approval by our Congress, not politicians from either party saying one thing or the other. No one can force that one person to keep the troops home or send them to war. The final decision belongs to that one person.
Just one person.He made his decision.

.

With overwhelming bipartisan approval from congress.

So we agree.
Just one person.

.

Take note of this everyone. This is how liberals see the world. and trick themselves and others into taking zero responsibility for anything including their own lives.