Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Saying they knew he had WMD's, when they didn't know.What lies?
The voted for authorization, but they weren't the ones making up the lies.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.
Clinton didn't attack Iraq, Bush did.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.
Why are the neocons "blaming" Iraq on the Dems?
Saying they knew he had WMD's, when they didn't know.What lies?
Saying they're trying all peaceful options to resolve the issue, when they already made up their mind to invade.
Saying all the intel indicated he did, when it didn't.
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.
So if someone buys the lie, the liar gets to go free?They swallowed them whole, however. Perhaps if we'd had a Benghazi-like investigation, we'd have not invaded Iraq. Where were those rabid investigators when there was actually something to investigate?
Saying they knew he had WMD's, when they didn't know.What lies?
Saying they're trying all peaceful options to resolve the issue, when they already made up their mind to invade.
Saying all the intel indicated he did, when it didn't.
Clinton didn't attack Iraq, Bush did.
And that's the bottom line, regardless of the spin.
.
So if someone buys the lie, the liar gets to go free?They swallowed them whole, however. Perhaps if we'd had a Benghazi-like investigation, we'd have not invaded Iraq. Where were those rabid investigators when there was actually something to investigate?
Not what I was saying. I wish they had investigated, instead of just buying the lies.
If wishes were fishes.
No, Iraqis do not say that. In fact, they say things are much worse now, than when Hussein was in power.Firstly, Iraq was/is not a 'disaster'. And Dave is right - it was a bi-partisan decision. In my own view, we should have dealt with Saddam the first time around instead of pandering to international cowardice.
The world is a better place without Saddam - ask the Iraqis. Many of whom will tell you their country - for all its problems - is better now than then... the Kurds are particularly better off. At least no one's using WMD on them now.
Here's a sample of what Iraqis are actually saying about what we did to their country...
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 [something I had mentioned]. 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.”
But they have said that.Lies?
Exactly how did the Bush administration lie about the intel of other countries without the heads of those countries saying "he is lying about the intel we showed him"....?
On March 15, 2002, British intel again said there's not much evidence to indicate Hussein has any WMD's.
Curveball granted German asylum, ceases cooperating. British spy agency MI6 has told CIA that "elements of [his] behavior strike us as typical of…fabricators." [Date the public knew: 11/20/05]
In May of 2002, US intel concludes Curveball is a liar.British intel reports that there's only "sporadic and patchy" evidence of Iraqi WMD. "There is no intelligence on any [biological weapons] production facilities." [Date the public knew: 9/18/04]
Most of the WMD evidence came from him and to treat that information as valid and go in front of the nation and say we "know" Hussein has WMD's, is one of Bush's biggest lies.Primary corroborator of Curveball's claims that Iraq has mobile weapons labs is judged a liar and Chalabi plant by DIA. A fabricator warning is posted in US intelligence databases. [Date the public knew: 3/28/04]
Bush was told many times about the problems with the intel he was using, but he dismissed those warnings and ran with the intel that would justify the war.French debunk yellowcake theory: "We told the Americans, 'Bullshit. It doesn't make any sense,'" says French official. [Date the public knew: 12/11/05]
.
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?
.
Excuse me??.. the 'blame' game comes strictly from the DEMs.. Booooosssshhh Liiiiiieeeeddddd, and all the other BDS stuff about Iraq...
Go find one! Go find one Iraqi that says things are better now than before.you fucking loser of a hack.
I can cite as many Iraquis saying the opposite...but that would be silly for I know you can cite as many saying the same.
You are out of your league when you try to debate knowledgable people.
Go crawl back under seawytchs fupa.
Thanks for the clarification.Not what I was saying. I wish they had investigated, instead of just buying the lies.
If wishes were fishes.
It wasn't Bush's call to say if Hussein was in violation of 1441, that was the UNSC's jurisdiction.He said that the intel gave good reason to believe there were WMD's you hack.
He never said he knew for sure for the only way he would know for sure is if he saw it you hack.
They did everything they could to warn Hussein. They gave him warning after warning. He was in breach of a treaty...a CEASE FIRE treaty, you hack. Do you know what a cease fire treaty is? It is one where one MUST COMPLY with the terms or the cease fire will be terminated...you hack!
He never said ALL OF THE INTEL you lying hack. He said the intel gave good reason to believe you mother fucking piece of shit lying hack.
It is people like you that get me sick. You are clueless as to what you debate about.
It wasn't Bush's call to say if Hussein was in violation of 1441, that was the UNSC's jurisdiction.He said that the intel gave good reason to believe there were WMD's you hack.
He never said he knew for sure for the only way he would know for sure is if he saw it you hack.
They did everything they could to warn Hussein. They gave him warning after warning. He was in breach of a treaty...a CEASE FIRE treaty, you hack. Do you know what a cease fire treaty is? It is one where one MUST COMPLY with the terms or the cease fire will be terminated...you hack!
He never said ALL OF THE INTEL you lying hack. He said the intel gave good reason to believe you mother fucking piece of shit lying hack.
It is people like you that get me sick. You are clueless as to what you debate about.
Saying they knew he had WMD's, when they didn't know.What lies?
Then you must be PISSED at Congress (1998 Iraq Liberation Act) and Bill Clinton (he signed the Iraq Liberation Act). Are you just as outraged at their outlandish "lies?" No?
