Why did so many Dems vote for Iraq War

[Kosh]

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.

Wrong!

When the went in Iraq there were more votes for it than in 1991. Although this vote was not really needed, even Bush said he wanted to show Saddam and the world the US was united in what they were going to up hold the UN mandates..

 

[Kosh]

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.

Sanctions issues were not a case for war.

Sanctions killed a lot of people, did not see the far left upset about that..

 

[blackhawk]

How many times are we going to rehash the Iraq war vote? The people both Republican and Democrat who voted in favor did so because they believed they were doing what is best for the nations security based on the intelligence available at the time. Voting to go to war is one of the hardest things a person will do Monday morning quarterbacking that vote is one of easiest.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Lots of people who voted for the war did so because of false intelligence, combined with a strong desire to do something to catch those who were responsible for 9/11.

Jr. and Cheney saw an opportunity to paint Saddam with the same brush as OBL, so they directed the anger of the American people towards Saddam.

And the far left propaganda continues without hesitation or question.

No, sir. You are the one LYING. What we knew in 2003 after inspections was much different than in 2002 when the vote for authorization of force was held.

Wrong! But you keep thinking that far left revisionist history exists in reality..

The U.S. stated that the intent was to remove "a regime that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, that harbored and supported terrorists, committed outrageous human rights abuses, and defied the just demands of the United Nations and the world."

So you are claiming all those are incorrect?

And none of that was a legitimate case for war.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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.

Sanctions issues were not a case for war.

Sanctions killed a lot of people, did not see the far left upset about that..

So? It didn't needlessly kill Americans.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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.

Sanctions issues were not a case for war.

Sanctions killed a lot of people, did not see the far left upset about that..

Stop believing lies would be a good first step for you.

http://www.psmag.com/politics/the-iraq-sanctions-myth-56433

 

[rightwinger]

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

 

[The Rabbi]

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

They were gearing up for their treatment of Obama.

 

[there4eyeM]

The iraq invasion: violation of international law and treaties voted on and approved by Congress, so part of the Constitutional obligation to honor, so war crimes and treason.

 

[Kosh]

Lots of people who voted for the war did so because of false intelligence, combined with a strong desire to do something to catch those who were responsible for 9/11.

Jr. and Cheney saw an opportunity to paint Saddam with the same brush as OBL, so they directed the anger of the American people towards Saddam.

And the far left propaganda continues without hesitation or question.

No, sir. You are the one LYING. What we knew in 2003 after inspections was much different than in 2002 when the vote for authorization of force was held.

Wrong! But you keep thinking that far left revisionist history exists in reality..

The U.S. stated that the intent was to remove "a regime that developed and used weapons of mass destruction, that harbored and supported terrorists, committed outrageous human rights abuses, and defied the just demands of the United Nations and the world."

So you are claiming all those are incorrect?

And none of that was a legitimate case for war.

Se how dangerous the far left religion is?

 

[Kosh]

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.

Sanctions issues were not a case for war.

Sanctions killed a lot of people, did not see the far left upset about that..

So? It didn't needlessly kill Americans.

So much for the far left and their whole "rights" stance.

 

[Stephanie]

Maybe it had something to do with the Billy Clinton administration before Bush

SNIP:
What Did The Democrats Say About Iraq's WMD ??

For several months, John Kerry and his peers have blasted President Bush over the Iraqi War. Interestingly, President Bush stated, simply, that there was a "grave danger" of Saddam Hussein acquiring and building "Nuclear Weapons and other WMDs" during "the next six months, at the time of the outbreak of war. He later stated: "We all believed there were stockpiles, since we'd been lectured on the subject by the Clinton Administration for several years." To date, not a single Democrat has owned up to responsibility for the claims of "stockpiles", which were not what President Bush stated. We note that the Democrats rely upon the weakness of the memory of the American Public to cloud the issue over. They blame Bush for Democratic Party misrepresentations. ACSA believes the Democrats are trying to ride their own misrepresentations into the White House, we thought we'd publish what each one said, among a crowd of similar statements by ALL the Democrats, who are now accusing Bush of something he did not say and did not do... This dishonesty by the Democratic Party has seriously muddied the political process in the 2004 election. Here's what the Democrats said about Iraq's WMDs (including the source of each quote):

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
- President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction."
- Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."
- Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | Source

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 | Source

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 | Source


all of it here:
What Did The Democrats Say About

 

[Kosh]

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.

Sanctions issues were not a case for war.

Sanctions killed a lot of people, did not see the far left upset about that..

Stop believing lies would be a good first step for you.

http://www.psmag.com/politics/the-iraq-sanctions-myth-56433

Right on cue as you link to a far left blog site for your "facts"..

 

[NYcarbineer]

147 Democrats voted against the Iraq resolution.

7 Republicans voted against it.

That's 21 times as many Democrats getting it right.

 

[BlindBoo]

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?

Another prime example of how dangerous the far left religion truly is..

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 1991 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Democrats: 10-45. 10 (18%) of 56 Democratic Senators voted for the resolution

Democrats: 86-179. 86 (32%) of 267 Democrats voted for the resolution.

See how entrenched the far left was in power back in early 90's?

Yet this far left drone will vote for Hilary as their rich white far left masters command them to do..

Wasn't that vote in support of UNSCR 678. To expel Iraq from the territory of Kuwait? President Bush(41) chose wisely then not to invade Iraq.

"While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome."

GWHB

Reasons Not to Invade Iraq By George Bush Sr.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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.

Sanctions issues were not a case for war.

Sanctions killed a lot of people, did not see the far left upset about that..

Stop believing lies would be a good first step for you.

http://www.psmag.com/politics/the-iraq-sanctions-myth-56433

Right on cue as you link to a far left blog site for your "facts"..

As opposed to you linking to nothing?

lol good one.

 

[Kosh]

The iraq invasion: violation of international law and treaties voted on and approved by Congress, so part of the Constitutional obligation to honor, so war crimes and treason.

Incorrect! That is a far left myth..

 

[kaz]

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?

The big lie of the Iraq war was Democrats saying you were lied to then using that to try to gain cheap political points.

You and the Republicans did that fiasco arm in arm, Homey. You did it, now own it and cut the lies

 

[Kosh]

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?

Another prime example of how dangerous the far left religion truly is..

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 1991 - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Democrats: 10-45. 10 (18%) of 56 Democratic Senators voted for the resolution

Democrats: 86-179. 86 (32%) of 267 Democrats voted for the resolution.

See how entrenched the far left was in power back in early 90's?

Yet this far left drone will vote for Hilary as their rich white far left masters command them to do..

Wasn't that vote in support of UNSCR 678. To expel Iraq from the territory of Kuwait? President Bush(41) chose wisely then not to invade Iraq.

"While we hoped that popular revolt or coup would topple Saddam, neither the U.S. nor the countries of the region wished to see the breakup of the Iraqi state. We were concerned about the long-term balance of power at the head of the Gulf. Trying to eliminate Saddam, extending the ground war into an occupation of Iraq, would have violated our guideline about not changing objectives in midstream, engaging in "mission creep," and would have incurred incalculable human and political costs. Apprehending him was probably impossible. We had been unable to find Noriega in Panama, which we knew intimately. We would have been forced to occupy Baghdad and, in effect, rule Iraq. The coalition would instantly have collapsed, the Arabs deserting it in anger and other allies pulling out as well. Under those circumstances, furthermore, we had been self-consciously trying to set a pattern for handling aggression in the post-cold war world. Going in and occupying Iraq, thus unilaterally exceeding the U.N.'s mandate, would have destroyed the precedent of international response to aggression we hoped to establish. Had we gone the invasion route, the U.S. could conceivably still be an occupying power in a bitterly hostile land. It would have been a dramatically different--and perhaps barren--outcome."

GWHB

Reasons Not to Invade Iraq By George Bush Sr.

And always the far left shows they do not understand what happened in 1991..

A political stance in order to appease the Saudi's so we could their terroritory for a base of operations. Many in the region did not like Saddam, but he was their Arab brother.

 

[kaz]

I'd like to say they were innocent dupes of bad intelligence

But in truth, they were cowards
In the post 9-11 hysteria, they were unwilling to take the tag of "soft on terrorism" and Republicans were chomping at the bit to use it. After the attacks, Bush was given a 9-11 card to do anything necessary in the war on terror....to oppose what he wanted was unpatriotic

It was the last time Bush used his 9-11 Card

And the first time Democrats used your 9-11 card. We haven't seen the last