When Everyone Agreed About Iraq

[Mac1958]

.

Iran definitely likes the new arrangement, though.

.

 

[Billo_Really]

.

Iran definitely likes the new arrangement, though.

.

No shit! We did, what 10 years of war couldn't do, put the shiites in control of the government.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

. . . .

The Iraq invasion was the most cowardly act this country has ever committed.

^ sometimes you just gotta let groinboi's imbecility sit there and speak for itself. What a clusterfuck of stupid that kid is.

 

[francoHFW]

So what was, then? Stupidest, anyway...

 

[Billo_Really]

^ sometimes you just gotta let groinboi's imbecility sit there and speak for itself. What a clusterfuck of stupid that kid is.

First we force the country to disarm, then we attack and drop more ordinance on them than all the bombs dropped in WWII.

Yeah, that was a cowardly act. And you're a fuckin' coward too!

 

[healthmyths]

So given the FACT Saddam wouldn't comply with the SANCTIONS and murdered by starvation 500,000 children
AND if he were still there today, still not complying, the sanctions in place, another 500,000 children would starve!
Sanctions began August 6, 1990, four days after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, stayed largely in force until May 2003 (after Saddam Hussein's being forced from power) or 13 years.

Iraqis say life was better under Hussein.

Iraqis cannot forget what Americans have done here

An impassioned young woman from the middle of the lecture hall spoke up. It was obviously not easy for her. “It is not,” she said, “about lack of water and electricity. You have destroyed everything. You have destroyed our country. You have destroyed what is inside of us! You have destroyed our ancient civilization. You have taken our smiles from us. You have
taken our dreams!”

Someone asked, “Why did you this? What did we do to you that you would do this to us?”

“Iraqis cannot forget what Americans have done here,” said another. “They destroyed the childhood. You don’t destroy everything and then say ‘We’re sorry.’ “You don’t commit crimes and then say ‘Sorry.’”

“To bomb us and then send teams to do investigations on the effects of the bombs…No, it will not be forgotten. It is not written on our hearts, it is carved in our hearts.”

The Iraq invasion was the most cowardly act this country has ever committed.

Maybe you should ask the 500,000 children that are NOW alive because the UN sanctions put into place because the dictator who wouldn't abide by
UN resolutions is dead and these children are alive!

"Some persons, such as Walter Russell Mead, accepted a large estimate of casualties due to sanctions,
but argued that invading Iraq was better than continuing the sanctions regime, since
"Each year of containment is a new Gulf War."
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, in his testimony to the Chilcot Inquiry, also argued that ending sanctions was one benefit of the war."

On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright (then U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations)
appeared on a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her
"We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know,
is the price worth it?" and Albright replied "we think the price is worth it."

Albright wrote later that Saddam Hussein, not the sanctions, was to blame. She criticized Stahl's segment as "amount[ing] to Iraqi propaganda"; said that her question was a loaded question; wrote "I had fallen into a trap and said something I did not mean"; and regretted coming "across as cold-blooded and cruel". The segment won an Emmy Award.Albright's "non-denial" was taken by sanctions opponents as confirmation of a high number of sanctions related casualties.

Why are all you people so quick to Bash Bush for liberating 28 million, and by removing Saddam therefore removing the sanctions that Saddam could have stopped if he had abided by UN resolutions and saved 500,000 starvation deaths???

 

[Billo_Really]

Maybe you should ask the 500,000 children that are NOW alive because the UN sanctions put into place because the dictator who wouldn't abide by
UN resolutions is dead and these children are alive!

"Some persons, such as Walter Russell Mead, accepted a large estimate of casualties due to sanctions,
but argued that invading Iraq was better than continuing the sanctions regime, since
"Each year of containment is a new Gulf War."
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair, in his testimony to the Chilcot Inquiry, also argued that ending sanctions was one benefit of the war."

On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright (then U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations)
appeared on a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her
"We have heard that half a million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know,
is the price worth it?" and Albright replied "we think the price is worth it."

Albright wrote later that Saddam Hussein, not the sanctions, was to blame. She criticized Stahl's segment as "amount[ing] to Iraqi propaganda"; said that her question was a loaded question; wrote "I had fallen into a trap and said something I did not mean"; and regretted coming "across as cold-blooded and cruel". The segment won an Emmy Award.Albright's "non-denial" was taken by sanctions opponents as confirmation of a high number of sanctions related casualties.

Why are all you people so quick to Bash Bush for liberating 28 million, and by removing Saddam therefore removing the sanctions that Saddam could have stopped if he had abided by UN resolutions and saved 500,000 starvation deaths???

Maybe you should ask the over 1 million Iraqis who died as a result of the invasion?

 

[Wehrwolfen]

Anyone with common sense would've thought Iraq had WMD's. I did. And supported Bush in the war.

I want to make a quick comment, though somewhat off topic.

There are 9-11 conspiracy theorists all over the world. And they point to the lack of WMD's as further proof of the plot.

I cant help but wonder....if the govt was so wicked and evil and forward thinking that it planned and carried out 9-11.....how the fuck could that same govt, after overthrowing and conquering a nation, not plant a few WMD's under a sand dune in Iraq to say "AH HA, we found 'em"?

After the speeches delivered by Clinton in the 90's about Sadaam and WMD I really believed that Sadaam was hiding his WMD. Didn't Wild Bill Clinton bomb Iraq as he did with Serbia. Oh, I forgot that was different because Clinton just wouldn't as a Democrat cause civilian deaths by bombing.
As Billy's wife would say, "What's the difference"? Why can't we just blame Bush and leave it at that?
Forget about the truth, we can always revise it out of history the Marxist way.

 

[francoHFW]

Sounds like you already did, the fascist way...

 

[francoHFW]

OP- everyone agreed to the lies and fear mongering, that it was treason (and political suicide) to not go along with the war..I was with the French all the way of course lol...

 

[Lakhota]

During the Clinton Administration, Saddam was contained between the Northern and Southern No-Fly Zones from the 1st Bush invasion (after Bush 41 had given Saddam the "green light" to invade Kuwait).

 

[Wehrwolfen]

Republicans are having a problem dumping Iraq onto the Democrats so they are in the process of dumping it on "everybody", not just Democrats. If pinning it on everybody works, later they might try pinning Iraq on just the Democrats.
The thing that is hard for them to change, however, is the war resolution, there it is in section 3 in black white stating that "...the president is authorized to use the armed forces of the United states as he determines to be necessary and appropriate...."
It does not say Bush has to, or must, but as he determines to be necessary and approppriate. It was Bush's decision, not everybody's, not the Democrats, not even Obama's.

Iraq Liberation Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act
Findings and ... · Support for groups ... ·
Contemplation of post ...

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq. It was signed into law by President Bill ...





H.R. 4655 - Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Iraq Watch - Accounting ...

H.R. 4655 - Iraq Liberation Act of 1998


H.R.4655 Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Enrolled Bill (Sent to President)) Bill Summary & Status for the 105th Congress. H.R.4655 Public Law: 105-338 (10/31/98)


Clinton Signs Iraq Liberation Act - Federation of American Scientists

Clinton Signs Iraq Liberation Act

Clinton Signs Iraq Liberation Act ... and war crimes by Iraq's current leaders as a step towards bringing to justice those directly responsible for such acts.

 

[Article 15]

By STEPHEN F. KNOTT
March 17, 2013

For years before the war, a bipartisan consensus thought Saddam possessed WMD.​

At 5:34 a.m. on March 20, 2003, American, British and other allied forces invaded Iraq. One of the most divisive conflicts in the nation's history would soon be labeled " Bush's War."

The overthrow of Saddam Hussein's regime became official U.S. policy in 1998, when President Clinton signed the Iraq Liberation Act—a bill passed 360-38 by the House of Representatives and by unanimous consent in the Senate. The law called for training and equipping Iraqi dissidents to overthrow Saddam and suggested that the United Nations establish a war-crimes tribunal for the dictator and his lieutenants.

The legislation was partly the result of frustration over the undeclared and relatively unheralded "No-Fly Zone War" that had been waged since 1991. Saddam's military repeatedly fired on U.S. and allied aircraft that were attempting to prevent his regime from destroying Iraqi opposition forces in northern and southern Iraq.

According to former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs Hugh Shelton, in 1997 a key member of President Bill Clinton's cabinet (thought by most observers to have been Secretary of State Madeleine Albright) asked Gen. Shelton whether he could arrange for a U.S. aircraft to fly slowly and low enough that it would be shot down, thereby paving the way for an American effort to topple Saddam. Kenneth Pollack, a member of Mr. Clinton's National Security Council staff, would later write in 2002 that it was a question of "not whether but when" the U.S. would invade Iraq. He wrote that the threat presented by Saddam was "no less pressing than those we faced in 1941."


(Excerpt)

Read more:
Stephen Knott: When Everyone Agreed About Iraq - WSJ.com

Are conservatives ever not trying to rewrite history whenever they speak of it?

Or is this a comedy thread?

The majority of Dems in Congress voted against AUMF Iraq.

This speech is a big reason we have an Obama administration and not another Clinton admin.

Grow a brain morAn.

 

[Article 15]

Republicans are having a problem dumping Iraq onto the Democrats so they are in the process of dumping it on "everybody", not just Democrats. If pinning it on everybody works, later they might try pinning Iraq on just the Democrats.
The thing that is hard for them to change, however, is the war resolution, there it is in section 3 in black white stating that "...the president is authorized to use the armed forces of the United states as he determines to be necessary and appropriate...."
It does not say Bush has to, or must, but as he determines to be necessary and approppriate. It was Bush's decision, not everybody's, not the Democrats, not even Obama's.

Iraq Liberation Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Liberation_Act
Findings and ... · Support for groups ... ·
Contemplation of post ...

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq. It was signed into law by President Bill ...





H.R. 4655 - Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 - Iraq Watch - Accounting ...

H.R. 4655 - Iraq Liberation Act of 1998


H.R.4655 Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Enrolled Bill (Sent to President)) Bill Summary & Status for the 105th Congress. H.R.4655 Public Law: 105-338 (10/31/98)


Clinton Signs Iraq Liberation Act - Federation of American Scientists

Clinton Signs Iraq Liberation Act

Clinton Signs Iraq Liberation Act ... and war crimes by Iraq's current leaders as a step towards bringing to justice those directly responsible for such acts.

Bill Clinton, like his predecessor, wasn't dumb enough to invade and occupy Iraq to try and make that happen.

 

[Lakhota]

Was Senator Paul Wellstone murdered? If so, who gave the order?

A month later, Sen. Paul Wellstone, the progressive icon from Minnesota, rose to the podium to object to a resolution that would authorize President George W. Bush to wage his war, absent the support of the United Nations. Gesturing forcefully, and punctuating his words with a deep knee bend, Wellstone warned that acting unilaterally would eventually be regretted.

"The pre-emptive, go-it-alone use of force, right now, which is what the resolution before us calls for, in the midst of continuing efforts to enlist the world community to back a tough, new disarmament resolution on Iraq, could be a very costly mistake," Wellstone said.

He'd never know how right he was. A few weeks later, Wellstone's life was cut tragically short in a plane crash in his home state.

More: Iraq War: Who Got It Wrong, And Who Got It Right (VIDEO)

Senator, family members killed in Minnesota plane crash - CNN

Was Paul Wellstone Murdered?

Was Paul Wellstone Murdered? | Alternet

Was Wellstone Assassinated by EMF?

EVIDENCE MOUNTS THAT PAUL WELLSTONE WAS MURDERED!

Sen. Paul Wellstone: More Proof of Assassination | Veterans Today

 

[Mr. Shaman]

When Everyone Agreed About Iraq

Let's HEAR IT!! for.....

....CHANGE!!!!

"Ten years have passed since the United States and its allies invaded Iraq, and it appears the majority of Americans consider this a regrettable anniversary. Fifty-three percent of Americans believe their country "made a mistake sending troops to fight in Iraq".​

​

 

[American_Jihad]

Why We Were In Iraq

March 21, 2013
By David Horowitz



...

In America, the demonstrations against the war were organized by two different groups. One of these was International ANSWER, a front group for the Worker’s World Party, which is a Marxist-Leninist sect aligned with the Communist dictatorship in North Korea. The other was the Coalition for Peace and Justice, an organization which was led by Leslie Cagan, a veteran 1960’s leftist and member of the Communist Party until after the fall of the Berlin Wall. The Coalition welcomed all factions of the left and was composed of organizations that ranged from the Communist Party to the National Council of Churches to Muslim supporters of the terrorist jihad.

Despite their efforts, the global protesters failed to stop the British and American military effort or save Saddam’s regime, which fell six weeks after the initial assault. This ended the filling of mass graves by the regime, shut down the torture chambers and closed the prison that Saddam had built for four to twelve-year-olds whose parents had earned his disapproval. But Saddam’s forces were not entirely defeated and regrouped to fight a rear-guard guerilla effort against the American “occupiers.” At the same time, the organizers of the anti-war protests had already determined to continue their efforts, this time in the arena of electoral politics. Accordingly, they directed their activists to march into the Democratic presidential primary campaigns and support the candidacies of anti-war Democrats like Dennis Kucinich and Howard Dean.

...

Muslim martyrs commit mass murder in order to get into paradise. This is a precise description of the progressive agenda. Why does the left want help the Islamic radicals to destroy America? To get into paradise. Call it socialism; call it Communism; call it social justice. It is a dream of the future that is so enticing it will justify any crime required to achieve it.

The radical left does not understand that the root cause of the social problems that confront is humanity itself. We are the root cause of the inequalities and injustices that we face. There will never be a socially just world because the “new” world that revolutionaries create will be run by the same human beings, who are corrupt and selfish and fallible by nature. A hundred million corpses in the Twentieth Century, the human detritus of the socialist experiment attest to this fact. To ignore it – and this is the basis of the revived political left – is delusional, but that does not make it any less dangerous. Radicals have a parallel goal to the goal of the jihadists, which is paradise on earth. And they have the same enemy, which is the Great Satan, i.e., the United States.

To confront this enemy in our midst we must reverse its perceptions. The mantra of the left is “the enemy of my enemy is my friend.” To defend ourselves we must adopt the view that the friend of my enemy is my enemy.

Why We Were In Iraq


On this ten year Iraq War anniversary, Frontpage editors have decided to repost David Horowitz’s article, Why We Are In Iraq, from our November 26, 2004 issue.

 

[Mac1958]

.

It's pretty telling when they're having to write pieces titled "Why We Were In Iraq".

Y'know?

.

 

[rightwinger]

147 Democrats in Congress voted against the Iraq war authorization. Did they know something 'everyone' else didn't,

or did they just get lucky? Because they were right, and Bush, who made the final decision, was wrong.

In addition to most of the major military nations in the world including Canada

 

[rightwinger]

Only ONE person made the decision to invade Iraq.........that was Bush

His blunder was one of the worst decisions in history