Why would anyone continue to claim the iraqi war was a failure?

[Mr. Shaman]

BOOOOOOOOOSH!!!! Oh and that CHAYNEEE too.!! Nuff said.

Yeah.....how dare we inconvenience the 1%ers/high-roller$ over something as insignificant as body-bags??

After all.....if the rich-families' kids can't play President, from-time-to-time, they just might pull-up-stakes & move somewhere-else!!

*

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvliUuXjbL4]YouTube - Bush laughs at no WMD in Iraq[/ame]​

 

[Mr. Shaman]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

Yeah.

It wasn't a "failure" it was a crime.

A crime that the Dems in congress voted for as well...

.....After the sales-and-marketing folks (at BUSHCO) convinced the general-population that if their Reps didn't support War, those Vietnamese gun-boats (that eventually hit-the-beaches, in California, after the fall o' Saigon) would just be a bad-memory.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ejph4LBdmmc]YouTube - WMD LIES - Bush Cheney Rumsfeld etc. - THE ULTIMATE CLIP[/ame]​

 

[georgephillip]

BOOOOOOOOOSH!!!! Oh and that CHAYNEEE too.!! Nuff said.

Yeah.....how dare we inconvenience the 1%ers/high-roller$ over something as insignificant as body-bags??

After all.....if the rich-families' kids can't play President, from-time-to-time, they just might pull-up-stakes & move somewhere-else!!

*

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvliUuXjbL4]YouTube - Bush laughs at no WMD in Iraq[/ame]​

Maybe the 1% ers/high roller$ should pay reparations to Iraq?

Just how many billion$ (trillion$?) in war profits have Halliburton, Bechtel and Boeing made from the war crimes in Iraq?

What is the profit margin on a single Hellfire missile?

Why should corporations and the richest 1% of shareholders profit from killing civilians?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Libya.

 

[georgephillip]

What's your problem with central bankers?

"CNBC senior editor John Carneyasked, 'Is this the first time a revolutionary group has created a central bank while it is still in the midst of fighting the entrenched political power? It certainly seems to indicate how extraordinarily powerful central bankers have become in our era.'

"Ellen Brown, author of the terrific Web of Debt: the Shocking Truth About Our Money System and How We Can Break Free, wrote recently about the rebels’ sophisticated financial operations in the following terms:

“'According to a Russian article titled “Bombing of Lybia – Punishment for Ghaddafi for His Attempt to Refuse US Dollar,” Gadaffi made a similarly bold move: he initiated a movement to refuse the dollar and the euro, and called on Arab and African nations to use a new currency instead, the gold dinar.

"'Gadaffi suggested establishing a united African continent, with its 200 million people using this single currency. During the past year, the idea was approved by many Arab countries and most African countries.

"'The only opponents were the Republic of South Africa and the head of the League of Arab States. The initiative was viewed negatively by the USA and the European Union, with French president Nicolas Sarkozy calling Libya a threat to the financial security of mankind; but Gaddafi was not swayed and continued his push for the creation of a united Africa...'"

CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names

 

[JRK]

BOOOOOOOOOSH!!!! Oh and that CHAYNEEE too.!! Nuff said.

Yeah.....how dare we inconvenience the 1%ers/high-roller$ over something as insignificant as body-bags??

After all.....if the rich-families' kids can't play President, from-time-to-time, they just might pull-up-stakes & move somewhere-else!!

*

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GvliUuXjbL4]YouTube - Bush laughs at no WMD in Iraq[/ame]​

Maybe the 1% ers/high roller$ should pay reparations to Iraq?

Just how many billion$ (trillion$?) in war profits have Halliburton, Bechtel and Boeing made from the war crimes in Iraq?

What is the profit margin on a single Hellfire missile?

Why should corporations and the richest 1% of shareholders profit from killing civilians?

To start with your classless
In addition you have no class
I am unsure where you heard the claim there was no WMDs found
thats untrue as this link clearly shows there was, 100s of them that Saddam was to suppose to have destroyed
From the UN'
xclusive: Blix Backed Bush on WMD
Stewart Stogel, NewsMax.com
Tuesday, Feb. 10, 2004
Documents Show That U.N. Inspector Believed Saddam Was Hiding Secret Weapons
UNITED NATIONS – U.N. chief Iraq arms inspector Dr. Hans Blix believed that Baghdad may have been hiding as much as 10,000 liters of deadly anthrax before the U.S.- and British-led coalition invasion of Iraq in March 2003.

According to experts, if properly weaponized, that amount of anthrax could neutralize a city the size of New York.

The admission by Blix was found in a private report sent to the UNMOVIC (U.N. Monitoring, Observation and Verification Commission) College of Commissioners just weeks before the invasion. The college is the U.N. body's executive board.

In his report Blix said that he had a "strong suspicion" that Iraq "is hiding" as much as 10,000 liters of the exotic poison.

The private proclamation went further than Blix's public statements where he insisted that weapons Baghdad could not account for was not proof they existed and were hidden.

A senior official at the French foreign ministry in Paris told NewsMax that he was aware of the assertion by Blix and believed it was made "under pressure from Washington."

On Thursday, CIA Director George Tenet told an audience at Georgetown University that his agency's assessment on Iraq's weapons of mass destruction was shared by numerous intelligence agencies other than the CIA.

Blix's report would seem to corroborate the Tenet claim.

Former U.N. chief arms inspector Rolf Ekeus had explained that anthrax is one form of WMD that is easily hidden and stored.
From the US senate
Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says
he 500 munitions discovered throughout Iraq since 2003 and discussed in a National Ground Intelligence Center report meet the criteria of weapons of mass destruction, the center's commander said here today.
"These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention, and yes ... they do constitute weapons of mass destruction," Army Col. John Chu told the House Armed Services Committee.

The Chemical Weapons Convention is an arms control agreement which outlaws the production, stockpiling and use of chemical weapons. It was signed in 1993 and entered into force in 1997.

The munitions found contain sarin and mustard gases, Army Lt. Gen. Michael D. Maples, director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, said. Sarin attacks the neurological system and is potentially lethal.
and lets not forget the pre 2004 remarks
Dems on Iraq – a quote recap « Sister Toldjah
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 Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

“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

“Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face.” –Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

“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

“[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, signed by: — Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

“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

“Hussein has … chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies.” — Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

“There is no doubt that … Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies.” Letter to President Bush, Signed by: — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

“We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them.” — Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

“We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country.” — Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

“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

“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

“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

“I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force — if necessary — to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security.” — Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

“There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years … We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

“He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do” — Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

“In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members … It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons.” — Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
“We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction.” — Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

“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

Prior Toldjah So posts:

 

[georgephillip]

"George W Bush, March 2002: 'F___ Saddam. we're taking him out.' [CNN]"

Iraq WMD Lies: The Words of Mass Deception

From Wiki:

"During the lead-up to war in March 2003, Hans Blix had found no stockpiles of WMD and had made significant progress toward resolving open issues of disarmament noting 'proactive' but not always the 'immediate' Iraqi cooperation as called for by UN Security Council Resolution 1441.

"He concluded that it would take 'but months' to resolve the key remaining disarmament tasks.[4]

"The United States asserted this was a breach of Resolution 1441 but failed to convince the UN Security Council to pass a new resolution authorizing the use of force due to lack of evidence.[5][6][7]

"Despite being unable to get a new resolution authorizing force and citing section 3 of the Joint Resolution passed by the U.S. Congress,[8] President Bush asserted peaceful measures couldn't disarm Iraq of the weapons he alleged it to have and launched a second Gulf War,[9] despite multiple dissenting opinions[10] and questions of integrity[11][12][13] about the underlying intelligence.[14]

"Later U.S.-led inspections agreed that Iraq had earlier abandoned its WMD programs, but asserted Iraq had an intention to pursue those programs if UN sanctions were ever lifted.[15]

"President Bush later said that the biggest regret of his presidency was 'the intelligence failure' in Iraq,[16] while the Senate Intelligence Committee found in 2008 that his administration 'misrepresented the intelligence and the threat from Iraq'.[17]

"A key CIA informant in Iraq admitted that he lied about his allegations, 'then watched in shock as it was used to justify the war'"

If the US maintains a military presence in (or over) Iraq after December 31, 2011, will you continue to support killing Iraqi civilians for money?

 

[ABikerSailor]

No, there weren't WMD's, and no, we didn't get OBL.

The Iraq war is a failure.

 

[BlindBoo]

I am unsure where you heard the claim there was no WMDs found
thats untrue as this link clearly shows there was, 100s of them that Saddam was to suppose to have destroyed...

Again. The Claim was that Iraq was actively producing new stockpiles of Chemcal and biological weapon and actively working on a nuclear bomb. No such factories or warehouses were ever found after the invasion or occupation. The only chemical weapons they found were old, not usable, and were from the 1980's war against Iran.


Dems on Iraq – a quote recap « Sister Toldjah
[/QUOTE]

So where in the Clinton liberation of Iraq policy does he plan on using US forces to oust Saddam?

Oh that's he never once considered sending in US troops right? Those plans didn't exist.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

And Libya? I love watching the BDS Wingers whining about DA BOOOOSH while at the same time cheerleading for their Hopey Changey One bombing the shit out of the Libyans. Man,what a bunch of dishonest Dummies.

 

[JRK]

I am unsure where you heard the claim there was no WMDs found
thats untrue as this link clearly shows there was, 100s of them that Saddam was to suppose to have destroyed...

Again. The Claim was that Iraq was actively producing new stockpiles of Chemcal and biological weapon and actively working on a nuclear bomb. No such factories or warehouses were ever found after the invasion or occupation. The only chemical weapons they found were old, not usable, and were from the 1980's war against Iran.


Dems on Iraq – a quote recap « Sister Toldjah

So where in the Clinton liberation of Iraq policy does he plan on using US forces to oust Saddam?

Oh that's he never once considered sending in US troops right? Those plans didn't exist.[/QUOTE]

(9) Since March 1996, Iraq has systematically sought to deny weapons inspectors from the United Nations Special Commission on Iraq (UNSCOM) access to key facilities and documents, has on several occasions endangered the safe operation of UNSCOM helicopters transporting UNSCOM personnel in Iraq, and has persisted in a pattern of deception and concealment regarding the history of its weapons of mass destruction programs.
(10) On August 5, 1998, Iraq ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM, and subsequently threatened to end long-term monitoring activities by the International Atomic Energy Agency and UNSCOM.
(11) On August 14, 1998, President Clinton signed Public Law 105-235, which declared that `the Government of Iraq is in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations' and urged the President `to take appropriate action, in accordance with the Constitution and relevant laws of the United States, to bring Iraq into compliance with its international obligations.'.

 

[Antiderivative]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

You forgot universal HC, passed by the Republicans at the expense of the American tax payer.

 

[LibocalypseNow]

'Regime Change' was desired and that's exactly what happened in Iraq. So it was a success. Their doing the same thing in Libya as we speak. So Foreign Interventionist Cheerleaders from both sides should agree on this one. You can't have it both ways. If you're a Foreign Interventionist Cheerleader,you would have to believe that both Iraq & Libya are successes. So forget about that whole 'D' and 'R' thing. If you support Regime Changes,you're actually on the same side in this debate. Period,end of story.

 

[ABikerSailor]

'Regime Change' was desired and that's exactly what happened in Iraq. So it was a success. Their doing the same thing in Libya as we speak. So Foreign Interventionist Cheerleaders from both sides should agree on this one. You can't have it both ways. If you're a Foreign Interventionist Cheerleader,you would have to believe that both Iraq & Libya are successes. So forget about that whole 'D' and 'R' thing. If you support Regime Changes,you're actually on the same side in this debate. Period,end of story.

Question..........why is it that bat shit crazy Bachmann keeps screaming that we've gotta support Kahdaffy?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

If you support our Government aggressively pushing for Foreign Regime Changes,than you would have to say Iraq is a success. Our Government is currently doing the same thing in Libya. Our Government has also done this many many times in the past. Libya/Iraq? Whats the difference? You can't have it both ways. You want Regime Changes? Well then you're on the same side as those you viciously attack. You may not know it but you are. Some are still just caught up in that 'D' & 'R' Game. They don't even know they're on the same side on issues like this. Oh well,i guess Ignorance really is Bliss.

 

[JRK]

'Regime Change' was desired and that's exactly what happened in Iraq. So it was a success. Their doing the same thing in Libya as we speak. So Foreign Interventionist Cheerleaders from both sides should agree on this one. You can't have it both ways. If you're a Foreign Interventionist Cheerleader,you would have to believe that both Iraq & Libya are successes. So forget about that whole 'D' and 'R' thing. If you support Regime Changes,you're actually on the same side in this debate. Period,end of story.

Question..........why is it that bat shit crazy Bachmann keeps screaming that we've gotta support Kahdaffy?

Thats the first I have heard that

 

[ABikerSailor]

'Regime Change' was desired and that's exactly what happened in Iraq. So it was a success. Their doing the same thing in Libya as we speak. So Foreign Interventionist Cheerleaders from both sides should agree on this one. You can't have it both ways. If you're a Foreign Interventionist Cheerleader,you would have to believe that both Iraq & Libya are successes. So forget about that whole 'D' and 'R' thing. If you support Regime Changes,you're actually on the same side in this debate. Period,end of story.

Question..........why is it that bat shit crazy Bachmann keeps screaming that we've gotta support Kahdaffy?

Thats the first I have heard that

Really?

Republican U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann is probably going to run for president. As she finds her voice on the national stage, she’s showing some skill at delivering nonsense ideas in sentences that, technically, make sense. Take a look.
* * * *

Here she is on Fox News last week. (Quote appears in the video at 0:24.)

“I would not have done what the president did in Libya. I would not have intervened now at this time. We don’t even know who the opposition forces are. We don’t know if the opposition is being pushed by Hamas, Hezbollah, or even Al Qaeda in Northern Iraq. That could be a far worse outcome than dealing with Gaddafi. Gaddafi is not necessarily been the best friend of the United States, but in some ways he’s been neutralized.”

Michele Bachmann's Libya Nonsense

 

[LibocalypseNow]

Question..........why is it that bat shit crazy Bachmann keeps screaming that we've gotta support Kahdaffy?

Thats the first I have heard that

Really?

Republican U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann is probably going to run for president. As she finds her voice on the national stage, she’s showing some skill at delivering nonsense ideas in sentences that, technically, make sense. Take a look.
* * * *

Here she is on Fox News last week. (Quote appears in the video at 0:24.)

“I would not have done what the president did in Libya. I would not have intervened now at this time. We don’t even know who the opposition forces are. We don’t know if the opposition is being pushed by Hamas, Hezbollah, or even Al Qaeda in Northern Iraq. That could be a far worse outcome than dealing with Gaddafi. Gaddafi is not necessarily been the best friend of the United States, but in some ways he’s been neutralized.”

Michele Bachmann's Libya Nonsense

Actually sounds pretty reasonable. I wouldn't call her statements "bat shit crazy" at all. I just don't understand how you can call her "bat shit crazy" over those comments. Is it only because MSLSD & The HuffyPost told you to call her that? I think her comments were very wise & reasonable. Not doing what this President did seems like a very wise thing to me. I still don't understand why we're bombing the Hell out of Libyans. Bachmann is actually right. Hey just my opinion anyway.

 

[ABikerSailor]

We've yet to put boots on the ground, and the only thing we're doing is enforcing a no fly zone.

Incidentally........you DO realize that in order to enforce a no fly zone, you've gotta remove the things that can blow you out of the sky, right?

 

[LibocalypseNow]

We've yet to put boots on the ground, and the only thing we're doing is enforcing a no fly zone.

Incidentally........you DO realize that in order to enforce a no fly zone, you've gotta remove the things that can blow you out of the sky, right?

Yea Iraq had a "No-Fly Zone" too. Regime Change is Regime Change. If you support that,you have to believe Iraq was a success. They're doing the very same thing in Libya as we speak. I see lots of posters on this Board cheerleading for this Libyan War on a daily basis. Unfortunately most are so caught up in that old 'D' & 'R' Game,they don't even realize they're actually on the same side as those they enjoy viciously attacking. Oh well like i said,ignorance really is Bliss.