Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
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.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
See how the far left leaves out Libya? One of Obama's illegal wars?
Clintons war in Bosnia was also the first illegal war by any president at the time. The second illegal war was Obama's war in Libya.
It is funny how the far left also claims that Afghanistan was the war worth fighting, yet they blast it every chance they get.
I can't quite work out whether that's the denial or the bargaining phase of the process.147 Democrats voted against the Iraq resolution.
7 Republicans voted against it.
That's 21 times as many Democrats getting it right.
Yet somehow, Republicans are trying to pin it on Democrats
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.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.And the far left propaganda continues without hesitation or question.
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
LBJ probably had good intentions too.
Masters in History...you, hater dupe ignoramus? Any actual argument? Derrrr....You lefties are delusional, you really are.
^ thatI'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
intel from the likes of the Repub Admin- installed, neocon in the pentagon- Douglas J. Feith - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia was especially egregious/gross/misleadingHilarity.Bush has been gone for nearly seven years.
Obumbler and his merry band of incompetents, including Hillary owns it.. all of it.
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 yet no democrat was idiotic enough to go and actually invade Iraq.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
Authorizing it is the same thing!
I [found] those words in a State Department Bureau of Public Affairs document dated 9/11/2003. Seems a little revisionary.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?
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.
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
It was brought up by me here because it was the topic of your thread.How many times are we going to rehash the Iraq war vote?
Just about as many times as right wingers....like you......bring up the fact that democrats also voted for the Iraq war.
Face itFace it lefties, Obama's lack of leadership and siding with the wrong side at every turn has helped set the ME on fire... it's an unmitigated disaster. Blaming it on Bush ain't gonna work. Bush has been gone for nearly seven years.
Obumbler and his merry band of incompetents, including Hillary owns it.. all of it.
