Why did so many Dems vote for Iraq War

[Kosh]

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.

So you admit to linking to a far left drone site as "fact", typical. See they would much rather watch the world burn that admit they are wrong!

 

[kaz]

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.

Bingo, so stop the Bush lied crap, he didn't, he believed it, and focus on that we should not have invaded, period. Democrats need to stop the lie they were duped and say they were wrong, but they learned. That would be something I could get behind. But continuing to use the lie you were duped for vote pandering I can't get behind

 

[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.

Incorrect! That is a far left myth..

It is a very right (correct) statement.

 

[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.

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.

President Bush? Far Left?

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Same reason Bush got away with the rest of his shenanigans, including the Patriot Act.

9/11

And, its the same reason why NO president, right or left, will repeal the Patriot Act. Nobody want to be the prez who let another 9/11 happen.

Related, I just read somewhere that weasel/turtle McConnell doubled down on NSA spying on Americans.

 

[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.

President Bush? Far Left?

See what happens when you defeat these far left drones with facts? Their programming can not handle it..

 

[kaz]

President Bush? Far Left?

You know what's funny is you would agree he's a "Neocon" wouldn't you? A neocon is a liberal by definition. LOL.

He spends like a liberal, trusts government to make our choices for us like a liberal, uses the military like a leftist and he never did much of anything for socons.

In what way is he not liberal?

 

[kaz]

Same reason Bush got away with the rest of his shenanigans, including the Patriot Act.

9/11

And, its the same reason why NO president, right or left, will repeal the Patriot Act. Nobody want to be the prez who let another 9/11 happen.

Related, I just read somewhere that weasel/turtle McConnell doubled down on NSA spying on Americans.

Yes, he and Obama, two peas in a pod. LOL

 

[Kosh]

Same reason Bush got away with the rest of his shenanigans, including the Patriot Act.

9/11

And, its the same reason why NO president, right or left, will repeal the Patriot Act. Nobody want to be the prez who let another 9/11 happen.

Related, I just read somewhere that weasel/turtle McConnell doubled down on NSA spying on Americans.

On May 26, 2011, President Barack Obama signed the PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011, a four-year extension of three key provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act: roving wiretaps, searches of business records (the "library records provision"), and conducting surveillance of "lone wolves"—individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to terrorist groups

 

[Luddly Neddite]

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.

Bingo, so stop the Bush lied crap, he didn't, he believed it, and focus on that we should not have invaded, period. Democrats need to stop the lie they were duped and say they were wrong, but they learned. That would be something I could get behind. But continuing to use the lie you were duped for vote pandering I can't get behind

This is very like the lies we heard from Ronnie Ray-Gun:

I don't know
I don't recall
I don't remember

Which do you want to believe? That Bush and Reagan were ignorant? or lying?

Either way, they lied to the American public.

 

[bendog]

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.

Bingo, so stop the Bush lied crap, he didn't, he believed it, and focus on that we should not have invaded, period. Democrats need to stop the lie they were duped and say they were wrong, but they learned. That would be something I could get behind. But continuing to use the lie you were duped for vote pandering I can't get behind

What do you think W believed? I think he truly believed the Iraq invasion would lead to a stable and democratic republic in Iraq, but in order to invade he had to sell Americans on Saddam having womd that could fall into terrorist hands, and create harm in America much greater that 9-11 ... so he hung his hat of trumped up evidence.

LBJ probably had good intentions too.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

Same reason Bush got away with the rest of his shenanigans, including the Patriot Act.

9/11

And, its the same reason why NO president, right or left, will repeal the Patriot Act. Nobody want to be the prez who let another 9/11 happen.

Related, I just read somewhere that weasel/turtle McConnell doubled down on NSA spying on Americans.

On May 26, 2011, President Barack Obama signed the PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011, a four-year extension of three key provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act: roving wiretaps, searches of business records (the "library records provision"), and conducting surveillance of "lone wolves"—individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to terrorist groups

Yeah dummy. That's what I said.

And the next prez will do the same thing.

No prez wants to screw up as bad as W did.

 

[Kosh]

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.

Bingo, so stop the Bush lied crap, he didn't, he believed it, and focus on that we should not have invaded, period. Democrats need to stop the lie they were duped and say they were wrong, but they learned. That would be something I could get behind. But continuing to use the lie you were duped for vote pandering I can't get behind

This is very like the lies we heard from Ronnie Ray-Gun:

I don't know
I don't recall
I don't remember

Which do you want to believe? That Bush and Reagan were ignorant? or lying?

Either way, they lied to the American public.

See how the far left misdirects with the standard far left religious talking points?

And Obama lies all the time, yet goes unnoticed by these far left drones..

 

[kaz]

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.

Bingo, so stop the Bush lied crap, he didn't, he believed it, and focus on that we should not have invaded, period. Democrats need to stop the lie they were duped and say they were wrong, but they learned. That would be something I could get behind. But continuing to use the lie you were duped for vote pandering I can't get behind

This is very like the lies we heard from Ronnie Ray-Gun:

I don't know
I don't recall
I don't remember

Which do you want to believe? That Bush and Reagan were ignorant? or lying?

Either way, they lied to the American public.

I know you're stupid, so I'll dumb this down for you.

Both parties had the information and said the same thing. You can say they both lied or they both didn't, but you can't say one lied and the other didn't. You may now return to your normal clowndom. That cracks me up, one of you do the stupid clown thing then the rest of you all copy each other. You are a true collectivist ideology

 

[Luddly Neddite]

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.

Bingo, so stop the Bush lied crap, he didn't, he believed it, and focus on that we should not have invaded, period. Democrats need to stop the lie they were duped and say they were wrong, but they learned. That would be something I could get behind. But continuing to use the lie you were duped for vote pandering I can't get behind

What do you think W believed? I think he truly believed the Iraq invasion would lead to a stable and democratic republic in Iraq, but in order to invade he had to sell Americans on Saddam having womd that could fall into terrorist hands, and create harm in America much greater that 9-11 ... so he hung his hat of trumped up evidence.

LBJ probably had good intentions too.

At least LBJ didn't lie about oil or his relationship to terrorist/oil families.

 

[Kosh]

Same reason Bush got away with the rest of his shenanigans, including the Patriot Act.

9/11

And, its the same reason why NO president, right or left, will repeal the Patriot Act. Nobody want to be the prez who let another 9/11 happen.

Related, I just read somewhere that weasel/turtle McConnell doubled down on NSA spying on Americans.

On May 26, 2011, President Barack Obama signed the PATRIOT Sunsets Extension Act of 2011, a four-year extension of three key provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act: roving wiretaps, searches of business records (the "library records provision"), and conducting surveillance of "lone wolves"—individuals suspected of terrorist-related activities not linked to terrorist groups

Yeah dummy. That's what I said.

And the next prez will do the same thing.

No prez wants to screw up as bad as W did.

See how the far left drones will not acknowledge how their messiah is worse?

 

[kaz]

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.

Bingo, so stop the Bush lied crap, he didn't, he believed it, and focus on that we should not have invaded, period. Democrats need to stop the lie they were duped and say they were wrong, but they learned. That would be something I could get behind. But continuing to use the lie you were duped for vote pandering I can't get behind

What do you think W believed? I think he truly believed the Iraq invasion would lead to a stable and democratic republic in Iraq, but in order to invade he had to sell Americans on Saddam having womd that could fall into terrorist hands, and create harm in America much greater that 9-11 ... so he hung his hat of trumped up evidence.

LBJ probably had good intentions too.

1) You didn't understand my post

2) I think he believed Saddam was a threat, he was, and that it was a job for us to fix, it wasn't. See point #1

 

[Kosh]

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.

Bingo, so stop the Bush lied crap, he didn't, he believed it, and focus on that we should not have invaded, period. Democrats need to stop the lie they were duped and say they were wrong, but they learned. That would be something I could get behind. But continuing to use the lie you were duped for vote pandering I can't get behind

What do you think W believed? I think he truly believed the Iraq invasion would lead to a stable and democratic republic in Iraq, but in order to invade he had to sell Americans on Saddam having womd that could fall into terrorist hands, and create harm in America much greater that 9-11 ... so he hung his hat of trumped up evidence.

LBJ probably had good intentions too.

At least LBJ didn't lie about oil or his relationship to terrorist/oil families.

And the far left propaganda drones shoots and misses by light years.

 

[Kosh]

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.

Bingo, so stop the Bush lied crap, he didn't, he believed it, and focus on that we should not have invaded, period. Democrats need to stop the lie they were duped and say they were wrong, but they learned. That would be something I could get behind. But continuing to use the lie you were duped for vote pandering I can't get behind

What do you think W believed? I think he truly believed the Iraq invasion would lead to a stable and democratic republic in Iraq, but in order to invade he had to sell Americans on Saddam having womd that could fall into terrorist hands, and create harm in America much greater that 9-11 ... so he hung his hat of trumped up evidence.

LBJ probably had good intentions too.

Sure FDR did, he lied the US into war.
FDR attacked a country that did not attack the US
FDR round up all those Japanese Americans and put them in camps.
FDR used two WMD's to try and the WWII early.

Yet the far left sees him as a hero..

 

[kaz]

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.

Bingo, so stop the Bush lied crap, he didn't, he believed it, and focus on that we should not have invaded, period. Democrats need to stop the lie they were duped and say they were wrong, but they learned. That would be something I could get behind. But continuing to use the lie you were duped for vote pandering I can't get behind

What do you think W believed? I think he truly believed the Iraq invasion would lead to a stable and democratic republic in Iraq, but in order to invade he had to sell Americans on Saddam having womd that could fall into terrorist hands, and create harm in America much greater that 9-11 ... so he hung his hat of trumped up evidence.

LBJ probably had good intentions too.

At least LBJ didn't lie about oil or his relationship to terrorist/oil families.

Democrats didn't know there was oil in Iraq? That's an interesting claim, any proof?

What LBJ did was the worst war policy in American history. He took the popularity and economic benefit of a war and institutionalized it by intentionally sending endless Americans to their deaths for his own personal benefit. No one has ever run a more purely self centered war than LBJ