nodoginnafight
No Party Affiliation
- Dec 15, 2008
- 11,755
- 1,070
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.
Still not as important as deciding what we do now.
This thread isn't about NOW - it's about having factual history.
Still not as important as deciding what we do now.
This thread isn't about NOW - it's about having factual history.
I'm an agnostic, raised and confirmed Catholic, but educated and cannot seem to believe in the supernatural. Besides, organized religions are a problem.
I did read the first sentence, maybe I missed your point
. Saddam was no different than most despots, and I don't believe we ought to be the police force for the world. So if Saddam was still alive, Iraq would still be a hostile country to its citizens, and the bullet points I posted would not be needed or considered.
He funded various terrorist groups, as well as Palestinian ones, but not Al Qaeda.Funny how 80% of the country believed Saddam was responsible for 9/11 after listening to Booshies and Fox etc for 6 months...
He paid the families of suicide bombers and other terrorist outside of Iraq which made him complicit in it all. I know facts are inconvenient things to your propaganda, deal with it.
Sadam spread a lot of money around, no one can say with certainty where it all went, do I think he was part of the planning and execution of 9/11, I doubt it, but he was a state sponsor of terrorism.
He funded various terrorist groups, as well as Palestinian ones, but not Al Qaeda.Funny how 80% of the country believed Saddam was responsible for 9/11 after listening to Booshies and Fox etc for 6 months...
He paid the families of suicide bombers and other terrorist outside of Iraq which made him complicit in it all. I know facts are inconvenient things to your propaganda, deal with it.
Sadam spread a lot of money around, no one can say with certainty where it all went, do I think he was part of the planning and execution of 9/11, I doubt it, but he was a state sponsor of terrorism.
He sponsored a group fighting in Palestine and a group fighting in Iran. He was opposed to religious fanatics like al Qaeda.
There is also evidence that around this time Bin Ladin sent out a number of feelers to the Iraqi regime, offering some cooperation. None are reported to have received a significant response. According to one report, Saddam Hussein's efforts at this time to rebuild relations with the Saudis and other Middle Eastern regimes led him to stay clear of Bin Ladin.
In mid-1998, the situation reversed; it was Iraq that reportedly took the initiative. In March 1998, after Bin Ladin's public fatwa against the United States, two al Qaeda members reportedly went to Iraq to meet with Iraqi intelligence. In July, an Iraqi delegation traveled to Afghanistan to meet first with the Taliban and then with Bin Ladin. Sources reported that one, or perhaps both, of these meetings was apparently arranged through Bin Ladin's Egyptian deputy, Zawahiri, who had ties of his own to the Iraqis. In 1998, Iraq was under intensifying U.S. pressure, which culminated in a series of large air attacks in December.
Again you are wrong. I was on a couple or political forums when Bush declared war on Iraq and every single Bush supporter was spouting out "there are ties between Saddam and Osama, some were even saying Saddam was resonsible for 911. The site is down now but if Whistlestopper Forums still had all their history you would be eating your words right now.Actually he didn't that is claim repeated by the far left in an attempt to make their fantasy talking point a reality. It's like how they claimed over and over Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her backyard when in fact that was Tina Fey in an SNL skit.He certainly implied it and every single Bush supporter at the time was eating it up and believing it.What Bush said was this that there was a relationship between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda he never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Please stop with the lying.
No I wouldn't because the truth is on my side especially when someone claims they know what every single Bush supporter believed.Again you are wrong. I was on a couple or political forums when Bush declared war on Iraq and every single Bush supporter was spouting out "there are ties between Saddam and Osama, some were even saying Saddam was resonsible for 911. The site is down now but if Whistlestopper Forums still had all their history you would be eating your words right now.Actually he didn't that is claim repeated by the far left in an attempt to make their fantasy talking point a reality. It's like how they claimed over and over Sarah Palin said she could see Russia from her backyard when in fact that was Tina Fey in an SNL skit.He certainly implied it and every single Bush supporter at the time was eating it up and believing it.What Bush said was this that there was a relationship between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda he never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Please stop with the lying.
He funded various terrorist groups, as well as Palestinian ones, but not Al Qaeda.Funny how 80% of the country believed Saddam was responsible for 9/11 after listening to Booshies and Fox etc for 6 months...
He paid the families of suicide bombers and other terrorist outside of Iraq which made him complicit in it all. I know facts are inconvenient things to your propaganda, deal with it.
Sadam spread a lot of money around, no one can say with certainty where it all went, do I think he was part of the planning and execution of 9/11, I doubt it, but he was a state sponsor of terrorism.
He was? Do you have evidence?
He funded various terrorist groups, as well as Palestinian ones, but not Al Qaeda.Funny how 80% of the country believed Saddam was responsible for 9/11 after listening to Booshies and Fox etc for 6 months...
He paid the families of suicide bombers and other terrorist outside of Iraq which made him complicit in it all. I know facts are inconvenient things to your propaganda, deal with it.
Sadam spread a lot of money around, no one can say with certainty where it all went, do I think he was part of the planning and execution of 9/11, I doubt it, but he was a state sponsor of terrorism.
He sponsored a group fighting in Palestine and a group fighting in Iran. He was opposed to religious fanatics like al Qaeda.
What Bush said was this that there was a relationship between Saddam Hussein's Iraq and Osama bin Laden's Al Qaeda he never said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated between Saddam and Al Qaeda. Please stop with the lying.
He funded various terrorist groups, as well as Palestinian ones, but not Al Qaeda.Funny how 80% of the country believed Saddam was responsible for 9/11 after listening to Booshies and Fox etc for 6 months...
He paid the families of suicide bombers and other terrorist outside of Iraq which made him complicit in it all. I know facts are inconvenient things to your propaganda, deal with it.
Sadam spread a lot of money around, no one can say with certainty where it all went, do I think he was part of the planning and execution of 9/11, I doubt it, but he was a state sponsor of terrorism.
He was? Do you have evidence?
Saddam Hussein s Support for International Terrorism
BBC NEWS Middle East Palestinians get Saddam funds
Saddam Rewards Suicide Bombers Families - ABC News
The Bush administration falsely established a connection between a 9.11 terrorist and Iraq. The purpose was to plant the seeds in the American conscious that Iraq was involved in 9.11; and it worked since more than 70% of people polled believed Iraq was involved.Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.
Liberals don't understand logic.
Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.
Liberals don't understand logic.
The Bush administration falsely established a connection between a 9.11 terrorist and Iraq. The purpose was to plant the seeds in the American conscious that Iraq was involved in 9.11; and it worked since more than 70% of people polled believed Iraq was involved.Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.
Liberals don't understand logic.
The Bush administration falsely established a connection between a 9.11 terrorist and Iraq. The purpose was to plant the seeds in the American conscious that Iraq was involved in 9.11; and it worked since more than 70% of people polled believed Iraq was involved.Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.
Liberals don't understand logic.
No
That is what the mainstream media did.
Bush never tired Saddam with 9/11.
The mainstream media put those words in Cheney's mouth?The Bush administration falsely established a connection between a 9.11 terrorist and Iraq. The purpose was to plant the seeds in the American conscious that Iraq was involved in 9.11; and it worked since more than 70% of people polled believed Iraq was involved.Bush never claimed that Saddam was responsible for 9/11.
He did claim that Saddam supported terrorists.
He did say that 9/11 taught us that we can't just sit back and wait for them to attack us first that 9/11 shows us we need to hit them before they hit us. Which is a reason we went after Saddam, to hit him before he hit us.
Liberals don't understand logic.
No
That is what the mainstream media did.
Bush never tired Saddam with 9/11.