Why did so many Dems vote for Iraq War

[BlindBoo]

Your buddy Kosh

Haven't been reading the discussion, have you?

brought up the Democrats support for the 1991 military action against Iraq?

Then he called Preisdent Bush 41 a far leftest and you called him a neo-con. I say he was just a con.

If you know what a neocon is, then you know HW, Slick, W and Obama are all neocons. You don't know, do you?

A neocon is a big domestic government spending liberal who supports free use of the military to install democratic governments we support. Think about it, all 4 are both of those in spades

What govts did Slick install. Bosnia? We carried Nato's air war. Obama? He carried on a fool's errand in Afghan, and enlarged on it. Obama has trouble making up his mind.

Kosovo, Haiti, Bosnia. Slick was the one who actually invaded Iraq,you don't remember that, do you? He created a Kurdish autonomous region there and tried to help the Shiites versus the Sunnis. He also attacked Afghanistan, the Sudan and Somalia.

How many soldiers lives did President Clinton lose during your so called invasions?

 

[BlindBoo]

Your buddy Kosh

Haven't been reading the discussion, have you?

brought up the Democrats support for the 1991 military action against Iraq?

Then he called Preisdent Bush 41 a far leftest and you called him a neo-con. I say he was just a con.

If you know what a neocon is, then you know HW, Slick, W and Obama are all neocons. You don't know, do you?

A neocon is a big domestic government spending liberal who supports free use of the military to install democratic governments we support. Think about it, all 4 are both of those in spades

Kosh appears to be beyond reason.

Both parties are of course big tax and spenders. The big difference is the GOP is willing to liberally spend the lives of other peoples children to invade and kill people in far off lands. The Dems haven't had a president like that since LBJ.

Liar, the Democrats are right there with them spending "the lives of other people's children" and invading other countries. Partisan hacks still blow my mind

Hahaha you're one of the biggest partisans on this board. Congress did not decide to invade and occupy Iraq.

 

[kaz]

Your buddy Kosh

Haven't been reading the discussion, have you?

brought up the Democrats support for the 1991 military action against Iraq?

Then he called Preisdent Bush 41 a far leftest and you called him a neo-con. I say he was just a con.

If you know what a neocon is, then you know HW, Slick, W and Obama are all neocons. You don't know, do you?

A neocon is a big domestic government spending liberal who supports free use of the military to install democratic governments we support. Think about it, all 4 are both of those in spades

What govts did Slick install. Bosnia? We carried Nato's air war. Obama? He carried on a fool's errand in Afghan, and enlarged on it. Obama has trouble making up his mind.

Kosovo, Haiti, Bosnia. Slick was the one who actually invaded Iraq,you don't remember that, do you? He created a Kurdish autonomous region there and tried to help the Shiites versus the Sunnis. He also attacked Afghanistan, the Sudan and Somalia.

How many soldiers lives did President Clinton lose during your so called invasions?

So if you invade countries and try to topple governments, you aren't a neocon unless enough soldiers die.

Got it.

Another stellar liberal intellectual contribution to a discussion. Thank you for that, sir. It has really moved us forward.

 

[kaz]

Your buddy Kosh

Haven't been reading the discussion, have you?

brought up the Democrats support for the 1991 military action against Iraq?

Then he called Preisdent Bush 41 a far leftest and you called him a neo-con. I say he was just a con.

If you know what a neocon is, then you know HW, Slick, W and Obama are all neocons. You don't know, do you?

A neocon is a big domestic government spending liberal who supports free use of the military to install democratic governments we support. Think about it, all 4 are both of those in spades

Kosh appears to be beyond reason.

Both parties are of course big tax and spenders. The big difference is the GOP is willing to liberally spend the lives of other peoples children to invade and kill people in far off lands. The Dems haven't had a president like that since LBJ.

Liar, the Democrats are right there with them spending "the lives of other people's children" and invading other countries. Partisan hacks still blow my mind

Hahaha you're one of the biggest partisans on this board. Congress did not decide to invade and occupy Iraq.

So when I say both parties are guilty, we should not have invaded, both did it and both were wrong...

...And you say bull, Democrat farts don't stink, they did nothing wrong, they aren't responsible for what they said or how they voted, Republicans are responsible for EVERYTHING

That is just me being "one of the biggest partisans on this board." That I think both were wrong and both were responsible for what they did. That is actually "partisan" to you. While you holding your party responsible for nothing isn't partisan.

Tell the truth, the dog is smarter than you, isn't it?

 

[paulitician]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

 

[kaz]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

Who are you talking to? The voices in your head?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

I fail to understand Libertarian isolationism.

The most basic role of government is to protect the rights of the people; this certainly includes the right to free enterprise.
If outside forces seek to wrongly encroach upon that right, government has a plenary duty to act. Seems pretty cut and dried, from a libertarian point of view.

What happens to economic freedom when the Iranians blockade the straits and we have no way to project force? There are times when you need to go places, kill people, break things; many times you need the cooperation and assistance of allies to do it.

 

[paulitician]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

Who are you talking to? The voices in your head?

Don't worry, ole Big Brother is busy inventing a new Boogeyman for you dunces to fear and hate. His 'ISIS' Boogeyman creation is fizzling out. Time for a new one. Permanent War is the goal. And with dunces like you supporting it, Big Brother feels very confident he'll achieve his goal.

 

[Carla_Danger]

An on-going "excuse" that many right wingers on here have about supporting the wasteful, horrible and unproductive war ON Iraq (not just "in Iraq") is that many democrats ALSO voted for such a war.....

They're somewhat correct on this and I, for one, have much less respect for those democrats who foolishly went along with the LIES of the murderous Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz...... It is salutary for right wingers to tacitly and finally admit that the war was a DISASTER and, to some extent, I don't blame them for trying to share the blame far and wide to ease their own sorry conscience.....

However, there's an ancient axiom that states:

If one tells you a lie.....and you repeat it thinking it to be true, ultimately WHO is the culpable liar?

We can start with the lie that the war was only about WMD. It was not. It was about enforcing a sanctions regime that was being undermined by Saddam with the help of France, Germany, Russia and the UN. The UN in fact had passed resolution after resolution condemning Iraq but refused to authorize action, because those countries were profiting from it.
As for WMD, in the post 9/11 world no one wanted to gamble on security Saddam had a 20 year history of state supported terrorism. To ignore that the possibility tha the would use WMD on the US would have been grossly irresponsible.
As for the Dems, the war was popular and most people supported it. As it was popular they went along with it, hoping to score points. When the war didnt end by the commerical break Dems were all other themselves to oppose it and condemn it Because Dems are the biggest hypocrites to walk the planet.
When the Dems got power in 2006 they could have cut off funds and made Bush withdraw from Iraq. But since Dems are not only big hypocrites but spineless gutless bastards they wouldnt take responsibility for the subsequent failure. They opposed Bush's surge, and tried to undermine it. Then they applauded Obama for winning on Bush's strategy. And then ignored Obama's failed surge in Afghanistan, because Dems are gutless hypocritical lying pieces o shit.

An on-going "excuse" that many right wingers on here have about supporting the wasteful, horrible and unproductive war ON Iraq (not just "in Iraq") is that many democrats ALSO voted for such a war.....

They're somewhat correct on this and I, for one, have much less respect for those democrats who foolishly went along with the LIES of the murderous Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz...... It is salutary for right wingers to tacitly and finally admit that the war was a DISASTER and, to some extent, I don't blame them for trying to share the blame far and wide to ease their own sorry conscience.....

However, there's an ancient axiom that states:

If one tells you a lie.....and you repeat it thinking it to be true, ultimately WHO is the culpable liar?

We can start with the lie that the war was only about WMD. It was not. It was about enforcing a sanctions regime that was being undermined by Saddam with the help of France, Germany, Russia and the UN. The UN in fact had passed resolution after resolution condemning Iraq but refused to authorize action, because those countries were profiting from it.
As for WMD, in the post 9/11 world no one wanted to gamble on security Saddam had a 20 year history of state supported terrorism. To ignore that the possibility tha the would use WMD on the US would have been grossly irresponsible.
As for the Dems, the war was popular and most people supported it. As it was popular they went along with it, hoping to score points. When the war didnt end by the commerical break Dems were all other themselves to oppose it and condemn it Because Dems are the biggest hypocrites to walk the planet.
When the Dems got power in 2006 they could have cut off funds and made Bush withdraw from Iraq. But since Dems are not only big hypocrites but spineless gutless bastards they wouldnt take responsibility for the subsequent failure. They opposed Bush's surge, and tried to undermine it. Then they applauded Obama for winning on Bush's strategy. And then ignored Obama's failed surge in Afghanistan, because Dems are gutless hypocritical lying pieces o shit.

There were precious few in either party in the spring of 03 who said, "Hold on ... are we sure about this?" But it was about WOMD. To say otherwise is not true. Bushii sold it on being necessary to make sure we wouldnt' be attacked by terrorists with womd. He had to. The public would never have supported it it he'd told the truth that he was nationbuilding.

As bad as it was for Dems to go along with post 9-11 war mongering...

The fact that the press did not ask the hard questions and demand better evidence was a travesty

Isn't that the truth!

 

[paulitician]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

I fail to understand Libertarian isolationism.

The most basic role of government is to protect the rights of the people; this certainly includes the right to free enterprise.
If outside forces seek to wrongly encroach upon that right, government has a plenary duty to act. Seems pretty cut and dried, from a libertarian point of view.

What happens to economic freedom when the Iranians blockade the straits and we have no way to project force? There are times when you need to go places, kill people, break things; many times you need the cooperation and assistance of allies to do it.

The U.S. is responsible for the mass brutal slaughter of Millions of Iraqis. That included thousands & thousands of innocent women & children. And for what?...

So it could install a Puppet Government and plunder its resources. That's the ugly reality most Americans stubbornly refuse to accept. The Iraq War was a horrific crime against humanity. The U.S. should actually be held accountable.

 

[kaz]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

Who are you talking to? The voices in your head?

Don't worry, ole Big Brother is busy inventing a new Boogeyman for you dunces to fear and hate. His 'ISIS' Boogeyman creation is fizzling out. Time for a new one. Permanent War is the goal. And with dunces like you supporting it, Big Brother feels very confident he'll have his Permanent War.

You're the government loving militaristic neocon, you want to be in everyone's shit. You want to invade Iran and the Ukraine and drive out the Russians. How is it you suddenly stopped at wanting to attack ISIS?

 

[M14 Shooter]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

I fail to understand Libertarian isolationism.

The most basic role of government is to protect the rights of the people; this certainly includes the right to free enterprise.
If outside forces seek to wrongly encroach upon that right, government has a plenary duty to act. Seems pretty cut and dried, from a libertarian point of view.

What happens to economic freedom when the Iranians blockade the straits and we have no way to project force? There are times when you need to go places, kill people, break things; many times you need the cooperation and assistance of allies to do it.

The U.S. is responsible for the mass brutal slaughter of Millions of Iraqis. That included thousands & thousands of innocent women & children. And for what?...

So it could install a Puppet Government and plunder its resources. That's the ugly reality most Americans stubbornly refuse to accept. The Iraq War was a horrific crime against humanity. The U.S. should actually be held accountable.

In other words... you have no meaningful Libertarian response to what I said. Thank you.

 

[kaz]

The fact that the press did not ask the hard questions and demand better evidence was a travesty

One they repeated when Obama ran for President, ay big guy?

 

[kaz]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

I fail to understand Libertarian isolationism.

The most basic role of government is to protect the rights of the people; this certainly includes the right to free enterprise.
If outside forces seek to wrongly encroach upon that right, government has a plenary duty to act. Seems pretty cut and dried, from a libertarian point of view.

What happens to economic freedom when the Iranians blockade the straits and we have no way to project force? There are times when you need to go places, kill people, break things; many times you need the cooperation and assistance of allies to do it.

The U.S. is responsible for the mass brutal slaughter of Millions of Iraqis. That included thousands & thousands of innocent women & children. And for what?...

So it could install a Puppet Government and plunder its resources. That's the ugly reality most Americans stubbornly refuse to accept. The Iraq War was a horrific crime against humanity. The U.S. should actually be held accountable.

In other words... you have no meaningful Libertarian response to what I said. Thank you.

Paulitician is a much a libertarian as Obama

 

[kaz]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

I fail to understand Libertarian isolationism.

The most basic role of government is to protect the rights of the people; this certainly includes the right to free enterprise.
If outside forces seek to wrongly encroach upon that right, government has a plenary duty to act. Seems pretty cut and dried, from a libertarian point of view.

What happens to economic freedom when the Iranians blockade the straits and we have no way to project force? There are times when you need to go places, kill people, break things; many times you need the cooperation and assistance of allies to do it.

The job of the American government is to protect the American people. Ousting Hussein didn't do that.

1) He was directly a threat to his neighbors and the Europeans. Why are we endlessly the ones who let everyone else off the hook and deal with their problems for them?

2) We need to leave the middle east and push domestic energy exploration and stop being the target of every bad guy

Yeah, removing Hussein wasn't wrong, he was evil and a threat. But what happened when we didn't attack ISIS? Jordan AND Egypt did it. We have to stop being policeman to the world, that isn't in the interest of the American people. Other countries need to stand up, they aren't doing that while we push everyone out of the way and do it for them

And stop asking Paulitician what libertarians support, he's a hard core leftist

 

[rightwinger]

The fact that the press did not ask the hard questions and demand better evidence was a travesty

One they repeated when Obama ran for President, ay big guy?

You mean tough questions like about his birth certificate?

 

[kaz]

The fact that the press did not ask the hard questions and demand better evidence was a travesty

One they repeated when Obama ran for President, ay big guy?

You mean tough questions like about his birth certificate?

No, about his past and complete lack of qualifications which as burned us repeatedly for 6 1/2 years now.

BTW, he lied about being born in Kenya, but it was irrelevant other than to show what a douche he is. He was the original birther, patient zero of the birther movement. But it was a lie, he was born in Hawaii. I thought you knew that big guy, you still thought he was born in Kenya?

 

[paulitician]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

Who are you talking to? The voices in your head?

Don't worry, ole Big Brother is busy inventing a new Boogeyman for you dunces to fear and hate. His 'ISIS' Boogeyman creation is fizzling out. Time for a new one. Permanent War is the goal. And with dunces like you supporting it, Big Brother feels very confident he'll have his Permanent War.

You're the government loving militaristic neocon, you want to be in everyone's shit. You want to invade Iran and the Ukraine and drive out the Russians. How is it you suddenly stopped at wanting to attack ISIS?

That isn't my position. And trust me, fat dumb Neocons despise me. As do Communist/Progressive assholes.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

Who are you talking to? The voices in your head?

Don't worry, ole Big Brother is busy inventing a new Boogeyman for you dunces to fear and hate. His 'ISIS' Boogeyman creation is fizzling out. Time for a new one. Permanent War is the goal. And with dunces like you supporting it, Big Brother feels very confident he'll have his Permanent War.

You're the government loving militaristic neocon, you want to be in everyone's shit. You want to invade Iran and the Ukraine and drive out the Russians. How is it you suddenly stopped at wanting to attack ISIS?

That isn't my position. And trust me, fat dumb Neocons despise me. As do Communist/Progressive assholes.

As do true Libertarians.

 

[paulitician]

Iraq was a much safer and stable nation before the U.S. invaded. That's the reality. Now it's a horrific nightmare for its Citizens. But the U.S. got its Puppet Government installed, and will now plunder its resources. It's not like the U.S. hasn't done that before.

First you claim the leaders of the targeted nation are 'Evil' and a 'Threat' to the World. Maybe even compare em to Hitler and the Nazis. Then you invade and slaughter Thousands. And finally, you plunder the nation's resources. It's happened many times before, and it will happen again. Who will the next targeted Boogeyman be? Who knows? But one thing we do know, is that there will be a new Boogeyman to wage War with. Bet on that.

I fail to understand Libertarian isolationism.

The most basic role of government is to protect the rights of the people; this certainly includes the right to free enterprise.
If outside forces seek to wrongly encroach upon that right, government has a plenary duty to act. Seems pretty cut and dried, from a libertarian point of view.

What happens to economic freedom when the Iranians blockade the straits and we have no way to project force? There are times when you need to go places, kill people, break things; many times you need the cooperation and assistance of allies to do it.

The job of the American government is to protect the American people. Ousting Hussein didn't do that.

1) He was directly a threat to his neighbors and the Europeans. Why are we endlessly the ones who let everyone else off the hook and deal with their problems for them?

2) We need to leave the middle east and push domestic energy exploration and stop being the target of every bad guy

Yeah, removing Hussein wasn't wrong, he was evil and a threat. But what happened when we didn't attack ISIS? Jordan AND Egypt did it. We have to stop being policeman to the world, that isn't in the interest of the American people. Other countries need to stand up, they aren't doing that while we push everyone out of the way and do it for them

And stop asking Paulitician what libertarians support, he's a hard core leftist

Absolute BULLSHITE!! What about the Thousands & Thousands of children the U.S. brutally slaughtered? The U.S. is 100% responsible for all horrific atrocities committed in Iraq as a result of its invasion. It should have been held accountable. The Iraq Invasion is a brutal horrific crime against humanity.