Why are the neocons "blaming" Iraq on the Dems?

[hjmick]

Last I checked it was a bi-partisan war

Last I checked it was a bi-partisan war

That doesn't answer my question.

.

Actually, it does answer your question if you look at it through non-partisan glasses. I believe the object of the posts you mention from the other threads, is to point out that people from both sides believed Saddam had the WMDs of which he bragged. Based on the man's history, there was no reason to doubt him. Hindsight is, of course, 20/20. As we all know now, he either had them and moved them, as some believe... Or, he didn't have them but feared his neighbors and the rest of the world so much that he wanted everyone to think he had them. Either way, I'm thinking he fucked up.

As to your other question...

At this point, what does it matter if going in to Iraq was a mistake? It's done.

But, in the spirit of giving you a bone to gnaw, it is my opinion now and it was my opinion then that it was a mistake. Certainly with all we were doing in Afghanistan at the time, Iraq could have waited if not skipped altogether.

 

[Jarhead]

Last I checked it was a bi-partisan war

Last I checked it was a bi-partisan war

That doesn't answer my question.

.

Actually, it does answer your question if you look at it through non-partisan glasses. I believe the object of the posts you mention from the other threads, is to point out that people from both sides believed Saddam had the WMDs of which he bragged. Based on the man's history, there was no reason to doubt him. Hindsight is, of course, 20/20. As we all know now, he either had them and moved them, as some believe... Or, he didn't have them but feared his neighbors and the rest of the world so much that he wanted everyone to think he had them. Either way, I'm thinking he fucked up.

As to your other question...

At this point, what does it matter if going in to Iraq was a mistake? It's done.

But, in the spirit of giving you a bone to gnaw, it is my opinion now and it was my opinion then that it was a mistake. Certainly with all we were doing in Afghanistan at the time, Iraq could have waited if not skipped altogether.

We had tens of thousands of Americans in the region at the time. If Hussein had those WMD's and used them on our troops...it would have been a mistake to NOT get them out of his hands.....not to mention, of course, it would have been a boost for al-quaeda as we would have been forced to retreat out of the sand pit.

 

[hjmick]

Last I checked it was a bi-partisan war

That doesn't answer my question.

.

Actually, it does answer your question if you look at it through non-partisan glasses. I believe the object of the posts you mention from the other threads, is to point out that people from both sides believed Saddam had the WMDs of which he bragged. Based on the man's history, there was no reason to doubt him. Hindsight is, of course, 20/20. As we all know now, he either had them and moved them, as some believe... Or, he didn't have them but feared his neighbors and the rest of the world so much that he wanted everyone to think he had them. Either way, I'm thinking he fucked up.

As to your other question...

At this point, what does it matter if going in to Iraq was a mistake? It's done.

But, in the spirit of giving you a bone to gnaw, it is my opinion now and it was my opinion then that it was a mistake. Certainly with all we were doing in Afghanistan at the time, Iraq could have waited if not skipped altogether.

We had tens of thousands of Americans in the region at the time. If Hussein had those WMD's and used them on our troops...it would have been a mistake to NOT get them out of his hands.....not to mention, of course, it would have been a boost for al-quaeda as we would have been forced to retreat out of the sand pit.

Good point.

 

[Jarhead]

Actually, it does answer your question if you look at it through non-partisan glasses. I believe the object of the posts you mention from the other threads, is to point out that people from both sides believed Saddam had the WMDs of which he bragged. Based on the man's history, there was no reason to doubt him. Hindsight is, of course, 20/20. As we all know now, he either had them and moved them, as some believe... Or, he didn't have them but feared his neighbors and the rest of the world so much that he wanted everyone to think he had them. Either way, I'm thinking he fucked up.

As to your other question...

At this point, what does it matter if going in to Iraq was a mistake? It's done.

But, in the spirit of giving you a bone to gnaw, it is my opinion now and it was my opinion then that it was a mistake. Certainly with all we were doing in Afghanistan at the time, Iraq could have waited if not skipped altogether.

We had tens of thousands of Americans in the region at the time. If Hussein had those WMD's and used them on our troops...it would have been a mistake to NOT get them out of his hands.....not to mention, of course, it would have been a boost for al-quaeda as we would have been forced to retreat out of the sand pit.

Good point.

We need to remember that the CiC has to look at all possibilities when he/shje sends troops to any region of the world.

If he had thought that Hussein had WMD's and congress refused him authority to enter Iraq, it would have been the repsonsible thing for him to bring everyone of those troops out of A-Stan.

 

[Crackerjaxon]

I blame Obama because he is responsible. He promised to end the war in Iraq. Instead, he continued Bush's policies.

He bought it. He can pay the price.

Bush isn't the President of the United States. Obama is.

 

[blackhawk]

.

There are several current threads in which Bush apologists are blaming the Iraq war on the Democrats. Long posts quote Clinton and the Democrats, point the finger at those Democrats who supported Bush's decision (yes, hate to say it, but he was the Commander in Chief, regardless of how hard some are trying to ignore that fact).

Well, wait a minute.

This sure looks like these people are admitting what many of us have been saying: That the Iraq War was a horrific waste of time, lives, limbs, minds, materials and borrowed dollars. Why else would these people be putting so much effort into blaming the Democrats for it? So you're agreeing with the rest of us, right? You're admitting it, right?

Any answers to that?

Well, any straight answers?

.

In hindsight the Iraq war was mistake I have no problem admitting that what I have problem with is the left pretending they didn't vote for the war and support it until they felt it was politically advantageous for them to stop.

 

[Mac1958]

.

There are several current threads in which Bush apologists are blaming the Iraq war on the Democrats. Long posts quote Clinton and the Democrats, point the finger at those Democrats who supported Bush's decision (yes, hate to say it, but he was the Commander in Chief, regardless of how hard some are trying to ignore that fact).

Well, wait a minute.

This sure looks like these people are admitting what many of us have been saying: That the Iraq War was a horrific waste of time, lives, limbs, minds, materials and borrowed dollars. Why else would these people be putting so much effort into blaming the Democrats for it? So you're agreeing with the rest of us, right? You're admitting it, right?

Any answers to that?

Well, any straight answers?

.

In hindsight the Iraq war was mistake I have no problem admitting that what I have problem with is the left pretending they didn't vote for the war and support it until they felt it was politically advantageous for them to stop.

Wow, thanks for the honesty. The current political climate means a party will take advantage of every opportunity, certainly. At the same time, the only thing that compares to war with liberals is abortion with conservatives. This is a damn emotional topic, and some honesty and humility is desperately needed.

.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

.

There are several current threads in which Bush apologists are blaming the Iraq war on the Democrats. Long posts quote Clinton and the Democrats, point the finger at those Democrats who supported Bush's decision (yes, hate to say it, but he was the Commander in Chief, regardless of how hard some are trying to ignore that fact).

Well, wait a minute.

This sure looks like these people are admitting what many of us have been saying: That the Iraq War was a horrific waste of time, lives, limbs, minds, materials and borrowed dollars. Why else would these people be putting so much effort into blaming the Democrats for it? So you're agreeing with the rest of us, right? You're admitting it, right?

Any answers to that?

Well, any straight answers?

.

You don't ask a straight question. So you have no right to try to quantify the nature of ANY answers you get.

Nobody, conservative or neoconservative is trying to "blame" the Deocrats for Iraq. That CLAIM of yours is just dishonest.

INSTEAD, folks are merely correcting the deliberately false impression YOU are trying to foster to the effect that BUSH single-handedly waged the war.

So, just to undercut your cheap ass dishonest propaganda AGAIN:

CONGRESS which consisted of Democrats and Republicans AUTHORIZED the Iraq War.

And nobody other than morons like you, Hac1958, is debating the wisdom of the Iraq War. That's a very different discussion. What HAS been pointed out to you is 9among other things) it was the liberal Democrat Administration of Bill Clinton which got the Act passed by the Democrat controlled Congress in 1998 that made it the public policy of the United States to effect Regime change in Iraq.

And TONS of Democrats assured us THEN and subsequently that Saddam had WMDs.

That was PART of the rational for seeking the regime change law. And it was later part of the rational for the authorization to wage war against Saddam's Iraq.

Denying it won't change it, Hac. The Democrats staked out that position before President Bush ever did and even before 9/11/2001.

 

[tjvh]

.

There are several current threads in which Bush apologists are blaming the Iraq war on the Democrats. Long posts quote Clinton and the Democrats, point the finger at those Democrats who supported Bush's decision (yes, hate to say it, but he was the Commander in Chief, regardless of how hard some are trying to ignore that fact).

Well, wait a minute.

This sure looks like these people are admitting what many of us have been saying: That the Iraq War was a horrific waste of time, lives, limbs, minds, materials and borrowed dollars. Why else would these people be putting so much effort into blaming the Democrats for it? So you're agreeing with the rest of us, right? You're admitting it, right?

Any answers to that?

Well, any straight answers?

.

Here's the straight answer. Iraq invaded Kuwait. Iraq then got its ass kicked by a coalition comprised of numerous nations to eradicate Iraq from Kuwait. Iraq then openly violated United Nations sanctions for years, then Iraq was invaded a second time by a coalition in 2003 consisting of:
Coalition Countries - Iraq - 2003

Afghanistan,
Albania
Australia
Azerbaijan
Bulgaria
Colombia
Czech Republic
Denmark
El Salvador
Eritrea
Estonia
Ethiopia
Georgia
Hungary
Italy
Japan
South Korea
Latvia
Lithuania
Macedonia
Netherlands
Nicaragua
Philippines
Poland
Romania
Slovakia
Spain
Turkey
United Kingdom
Uzbekistan

Which, incidentally was nearly double the amount of countries Obama had supporting him in his Libyan campaign. Finally Saddam Hussein was finished. If Iraq was anyone's fault it was Saddam Hussein, and his regime. That is the straight answer.

 

[Mac1958]

.

There are several current threads in which Bush apologists are blaming the Iraq war on the Democrats. Long posts quote Clinton and the Democrats, point the finger at those Democrats who supported Bush's decision (yes, hate to say it, but he was the Commander in Chief, regardless of how hard some are trying to ignore that fact).

Well, wait a minute.

This sure looks like these people are admitting what many of us have been saying: That the Iraq War was a horrific waste of time, lives, limbs, minds, materials and borrowed dollars. Why else would these people be putting so much effort into blaming the Democrats for it? So you're agreeing with the rest of us, right? You're admitting it, right?

Any answers to that?

Well, any straight answers?

.

You don't ask a straight question. So you have no right to try to quantify the nature of ANY answers you get.

Nobody, conservative or neoconservative is trying to "blame" the Deocrats for Iraq. That CLAIM of yours is just dishonest.

INSTEAD, folks are merely correcting the deliberately false impression YOU are trying to foster to the effect that BUSH single-handedly waged the war.

So, just to undercut your cheap ass dishonest propaganda AGAIN:

CONGRESS which consisted of Democrats and Republicans AUTHORIZED the Iraq War.

And nobody other than morons like you, Hac1958, is debating the wisdom of the Iraq War. That's a very different discussion. What HAS been pointed out to you is 9among other things) it was the liberal Democrat Administration of Bill Clinton which got the Act passed by the Democrat controlled Congress in 1998 that made it the public policy of the United States to effect Regime change in Iraq.

And TONS of Democrats assured us THEN and subsequently that Saddam had WMDs.

That was PART of the rational for seeking the regime change law. And it was later part of the rational for the authorization to wage war against Saddam's Iraq.

Denying it won't change it, Hac. The Democrats staked out that position before President Bush ever did and even before 9/11/2001.

Too bad the personal insults and name-calling are necessary for you.

The fact remains you refuse to put responsibility with the Commander in Chief.

If he had a (D) after his name, you would be.

.

 

[DiamondDave]

.

There are several current threads in which Bush apologists are blaming the Iraq war on the Democrats. Long posts quote Clinton and the Democrats, point the finger at those Democrats who supported Bush's decision (yes, hate to say it, but he was the Commander in Chief, regardless of how hard some are trying to ignore that fact).

Well, wait a minute.

This sure looks like these people are admitting what many of us have been saying: That the Iraq War was a horrific waste of time, lives, limbs, minds, materials and borrowed dollars. Why else would these people be putting so much effort into blaming the Democrats for it? So you're agreeing with the rest of us, right? You're admitting it, right?

Any answers to that?

Well, any straight answers?

.

You don't ask a straight question. So you have no right to try to quantify the nature of ANY answers you get.

Nobody, conservative or neoconservative is trying to "blame" the Deocrats for Iraq. That CLAIM of yours is just dishonest.

INSTEAD, folks are merely correcting the deliberately false impression YOU are trying to foster to the effect that BUSH single-handedly waged the war.

So, just to undercut your cheap ass dishonest propaganda AGAIN:

CONGRESS which consisted of Democrats and Republicans AUTHORIZED the Iraq War.

And nobody other than morons like you, Hac1958, is debating the wisdom of the Iraq War. That's a very different discussion. What HAS been pointed out to you is 9among other things) it was the liberal Democrat Administration of Bill Clinton which got the Act passed by the Democrat controlled Congress in 1998 that made it the public policy of the United States to effect Regime change in Iraq.

And TONS of Democrats assured us THEN and subsequently that Saddam had WMDs.

That was PART of the rational for seeking the regime change law. And it was later part of the rational for the authorization to wage war against Saddam's Iraq.

Denying it won't change it, Hac. The Democrats staked out that position before President Bush ever did and even before 9/11/2001.

Too bad the personal insults and name-calling are necessary for you.

The fact remains you refuse to put responsibility with the Commander in Chief.

If he had a (D) after his name, you would be.

.

Yet you seem to only put it there when there is an R after the name

 

[Mac1958]

You don't ask a straight question. So you have no right to try to quantify the nature of ANY answers you get.

Nobody, conservative or neoconservative is trying to "blame" the Deocrats for Iraq. That CLAIM of yours is just dishonest.

INSTEAD, folks are merely correcting the deliberately false impression YOU are trying to foster to the effect that BUSH single-handedly waged the war.

So, just to undercut your cheap ass dishonest propaganda AGAIN:

CONGRESS which consisted of Democrats and Republicans AUTHORIZED the Iraq War.

And nobody other than morons like you, Hac1958, is debating the wisdom of the Iraq War. That's a very different discussion. What HAS been pointed out to you is 9among other things) it was the liberal Democrat Administration of Bill Clinton which got the Act passed by the Democrat controlled Congress in 1998 that made it the public policy of the United States to effect Regime change in Iraq.

And TONS of Democrats assured us THEN and subsequently that Saddam had WMDs.

That was PART of the rational for seeking the regime change law. And it was later part of the rational for the authorization to wage war against Saddam's Iraq.

Denying it won't change it, Hac. The Democrats staked out that position before President Bush ever did and even before 9/11/2001.

Too bad the personal insults and name-calling are necessary for you.

The fact remains you refuse to put responsibility with the Commander in Chief.

If he had a (D) after his name, you would be.

.

Yet you seem to only put it there when there is an R after the name

And how would I do otherwise with the Iraq War?

.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

.

There are several current threads in which Bush apologists are blaming the Iraq war on the Democrats. Long posts quote Clinton and the Democrats, point the finger at those Democrats who supported Bush's decision (yes, hate to say it, but he was the Commander in Chief, regardless of how hard some are trying to ignore that fact).

Well, wait a minute.

This sure looks like these people are admitting what many of us have been saying: That the Iraq War was a horrific waste of time, lives, limbs, minds, materials and borrowed dollars. Why else would these people be putting so much effort into blaming the Democrats for it? So you're agreeing with the rest of us, right? You're admitting it, right?

Any answers to that?

Well, any straight answers?

.

You don't ask a straight question. So you have no right to try to quantify the nature of ANY answers you get.

Nobody, conservative or neoconservative is trying to "blame" the Deocrats for Iraq. That CLAIM of yours is just dishonest.

INSTEAD, folks are merely correcting the deliberately false impression YOU are trying to foster to the effect that BUSH single-handedly waged the war.

So, just to undercut your cheap ass dishonest propaganda AGAIN:

CONGRESS which consisted of Democrats and Republicans AUTHORIZED the Iraq War.

And nobody other than morons like you, Hac1958, is debating the wisdom of the Iraq War. That's a very different discussion. What HAS been pointed out to you is 9among other things) it was the liberal Democrat Administration of Bill Clinton which got the Act passed by the Democrat controlled Congress in 1998 that made it the public policy of the United States to effect Regime change in Iraq.

And TONS of Democrats assured us THEN and subsequently that Saddam had WMDs.

That was PART of the rational for seeking the regime change law. And it was later part of the rational for the authorization to wage war against Saddam's Iraq.

Denying it won't change it, Hac. The Democrats staked out that position before President Bush ever did and even before 9/11/2001.

Too bad the personal insults and name-calling are necessary for you.

The fact remains you refuse to put responsibility with the Commander in Chief.

If he had a (D) after his name, you would be.

.

It amuses me endlessly to watch your propaganda get called out and exposed.

You are entirely disinterested in any kind of honest discussion or debate. Your sole objective is to blame Bush for the Iraq war. Yet you propagandist wannabes can't handle any kind of scrutiny.

Did Bill Clinton (the fellow with the D after his name bear any responsibility for the Iraq Liberation Act? Did Bill Clinton with the D after his name bear any responsibility for his repeated claims that Saddam had WMDs?

Or can you only point your finger when the person you want to accuse has the R after his name?

;

 

[NYcarbineer]

Left wingers have been whining about Iraq for years. That's the only blame that's going on. The truth is that Democrats authorized president Bush to use combat Troops and then they sat back and pretended to be bystanders or worse, members of the jihad.

That's not true. The Democrats in the House voted against the authorization, so if the Democrats had had their way, there would have never been an Iraq war because the authorization would have never passed the House.

I don't know if you suffer from long-term memory loss, or dementia, or late-stage Alzheimer's, so I will give you the opportunity to do the necessary research and retract your FALSE statement about the House Democrat vote in October of 2002.

Take your time. We all understand that you are a little slow. All New York liberals are.

I will bet you $1000 right now that more House Democrats voted against the authorization than voted for it in 2002.

You braindead useless twat. lolol. I'm going to immortalize your sorry ass in the flame zone.

 

[DiamondDave]

Too bad the personal insults and name-calling are necessary for you.

The fact remains you refuse to put responsibility with the Commander in Chief.

If he had a (D) after his name, you would be.

.

Yet you seem to only put it there when there is an R after the name

And how would I do otherwise with the Iraq War?

.

The situation with Iraq went over 4 presidents total.. not just Bush II... Bush did not single handedly do everything on an island..

But since you have set the precedent that the 'buck stops' with the president, I look forward to all the blame you place directly on the current preseident

 

[IlarMeilyr]

A majority of the Democrats in the House did vote against the authorization for the Iraq war. A significant number however did vote FOR it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

.

There are several current threads in which Bush apologists are blaming the Iraq war on the Democrats. Long posts quote Clinton and the Democrats, point the finger at those Democrats who supported Bush's decision (yes, hate to say it, but he was the Commander in Chief, regardless of how hard some are trying to ignore that fact).

Well, wait a minute.

This sure looks like these people are admitting what many of us have been saying: That the Iraq War was a horrific waste of time, lives, limbs, minds, materials and borrowed dollars. Why else would these people be putting so much effort into blaming the Democrats for it? So you're agreeing with the rest of us, right? You're admitting it, right?

Any answers to that?

Well, any straight answers?

.

You don't ask a straight question. So you have no right to try to quantify the nature of ANY answers you get.

Nobody, conservative or neoconservative is trying to "blame" the Deocrats for Iraq. That CLAIM of yours is just dishonest.

INSTEAD, folks are merely correcting the deliberately false impression YOU are trying to foster to the effect that BUSH single-handedly waged the war.

So, just to undercut your cheap ass dishonest propaganda AGAIN:

CONGRESS which consisted of Democrats and Republicans AUTHORIZED the Iraq War.

And nobody other than morons like you, Hac1958, is debating the wisdom of the Iraq War. That's a very different discussion. What HAS been pointed out to you is 9among other things) it was the liberal Democrat Administration of Bill Clinton which got the Act passed by the Democrat controlled Congress in 1998 that made it the public policy of the United States to effect Regime change in Iraq.

And TONS of Democrats assured us THEN and subsequently that Saddam had WMDs.

That was PART of the rational for seeking the regime change law. And it was later part of the rational for the authorization to wage war against Saddam's Iraq.

Denying it won't change it, Hac. The Democrats staked out that position before President Bush ever did and even before 9/11/2001.

Most Democrats in Congress voted against the authorization. I don't know how you get from most Democrats being against the war to most Democrats being for it.

 

[IlarMeilyr]

.

There are several current threads in which Bush apologists are blaming the Iraq war on the Democrats. Long posts quote Clinton and the Democrats, point the finger at those Democrats who supported Bush's decision (yes, hate to say it, but he was the Commander in Chief, regardless of how hard some are trying to ignore that fact).

Well, wait a minute.

This sure looks like these people are admitting what many of us have been saying: That the Iraq War was a horrific waste of time, lives, limbs, minds, materials and borrowed dollars. Why else would these people be putting so much effort into blaming the Democrats for it? So you're agreeing with the rest of us, right? You're admitting it, right?

Any answers to that?

Well, any straight answers?

.

You don't ask a straight question. So you have no right to try to quantify the nature of ANY answers you get.

Nobody, conservative or neoconservative is trying to "blame" the Deocrats for Iraq. That CLAIM of yours is just dishonest.

INSTEAD, folks are merely correcting the deliberately false impression YOU are trying to foster to the effect that BUSH single-handedly waged the war.

So, just to undercut your cheap ass dishonest propaganda AGAIN:

CONGRESS which consisted of Democrats and Republicans AUTHORIZED the Iraq War.

And nobody other than morons like you, Hac1958, is debating the wisdom of the Iraq War. That's a very different discussion. What HAS been pointed out to you is 9among other things) it was the liberal Democrat Administration of Bill Clinton which got the Act passed by the Democrat controlled Congress in 1998 that made it the public policy of the United States to effect Regime change in Iraq.

And TONS of Democrats assured us THEN and subsequently that Saddam had WMDs.

That was PART of the rational for seeking the regime change law. And it was later part of the rational for the authorization to wage war against Saddam's Iraq.

Denying it won't change it, Hac. The Democrats staked out that position before President Bush ever did and even before 9/11/2001.

Most Democrats in Congress voted against the authorization. I don't know how you get from most Democrats being against the war to most Democrats being for it.

Well, show me where I said most Democrats were for the war.

Then we can talk.

 

[Mac1958]

You don't ask a straight question. So you have no right to try to quantify the nature of ANY answers you get.

Nobody, conservative or neoconservative is trying to "blame" the Deocrats for Iraq. That CLAIM of yours is just dishonest.

INSTEAD, folks are merely correcting the deliberately false impression YOU are trying to foster to the effect that BUSH single-handedly waged the war.

So, just to undercut your cheap ass dishonest propaganda AGAIN:

CONGRESS which consisted of Democrats and Republicans AUTHORIZED the Iraq War.

And nobody other than morons like you, Hac1958, is debating the wisdom of the Iraq War. That's a very different discussion. What HAS been pointed out to you is 9among other things) it was the liberal Democrat Administration of Bill Clinton which got the Act passed by the Democrat controlled Congress in 1998 that made it the public policy of the United States to effect Regime change in Iraq.

And TONS of Democrats assured us THEN and subsequently that Saddam had WMDs.

That was PART of the rational for seeking the regime change law. And it was later part of the rational for the authorization to wage war against Saddam's Iraq.

Denying it won't change it, Hac. The Democrats staked out that position before President Bush ever did and even before 9/11/2001.

Too bad the personal insults and name-calling are necessary for you.

The fact remains you refuse to put responsibility with the Commander in Chief.

If he had a (D) after his name, you would be.

.

It amuses me endlessly to watch your propaganda get called out and exposed.

You are entirely disinterested in any kind of honest discussion or debate. Your sole objective is to blame Bush for the Iraq war. Yet you propagandist wannabes can't handle any kind of scrutiny.

Did Bill Clinton (the fellow with the D after his name bear any responsibility for the Iraq Liberation Act? Did Bill Clinton with the D after his name bear any responsibility for his repeated claims that Saddam had WMDs?

Or can you only point your finger when the person you want to accuse has the R after his name?

;

I hate the Iraq war. I didn't want it. The Commander in Chief, party affiliation irrelevant, put us there. It was ultimately his call, Congressional approval or not. He wanted it, he asked for it, he got it. And his apologists refuse to admit that. If Clinton had done it, same thing. I don't give a crap about parties, since I give politicians zero credibility.

That's all I'm saying. Play all the games you want.

.

 

[NYcarbineer]

A majority of the Democrats in the House did vote against the authorization for the Iraq war.

Then stop pretending they didn't, you idiot.