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

[Uncensored2008]

Simply accusing some one of reading talking points over and over is not a rational argument and does not in any way prove or disprove their assertions.

Simply posting talking points is no a rational argument and does not have merit as an assertion.

I understand that the KOS Kunts are programmed to recite certain lines, but there is no onus upon me or anyone else to lend credence to those lines.

Since you keep falling back on this simplistic tactic to sidestep the argument, I would be inclined to think you have no response but refuse to admit you are wrong.

 

[deepthunk]

I am starting to see the "arrest GWB" for war crimes crowd showing up

If you believe that there is some law in this world that prevents this country to take action to either defend them selves and or to remove a regime that this country feels is in its best interest to do so, then your badly mistaken

when this event took place in congress
Senate approves Iraq war resolution - CNN
It began the path to make it legal
when this event took place in congress in 2006, it finished the path to be a legal war
Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says

It is so simple I cannot believe that people would for one second think this war was anything but in our best interest

When did Iraq launch an armed attack against the US?
When did it threaten such an attack?
What UN Security Council Resolution specifically authorized the use of force against Iraq?

Bush and Cheney are war whores who didn't even have the integrity to risk their own lives in Vietnam.
They should be dropped through trap doors at the end of short ropes.

1993 was the first attack against the US by Iraq
These questions have an obvious bearing not only on past events but on possible future ones as well. [2] It is important to know who Ramzi Yousef is and who his "friends" are, because if he is not just a bomber-for-hire, or an Islamic militant loosely connected to other Muslim fundamentalists, Yousef's "friends" could still prove very dangerous to the United States. It is of considerable interest, therefore, that a very persuasive case can be made that Ramzi Yousef is an Iraqi intelligence agent, and that his bombing conspiracies were meant as Saddam Hussein's revenge for the Gulf War. If so, and if, as U.S. officials strongly suspect, Baghdad still secretly possesses biological warfare agents, then we may still not have heard the last from Saddam Hussein.
Few Americans are aware of the true scale of the destructive ambition behind that bomb, this despite the fact that two years later, the key figure responsible for building it--a man who had entered the United Stares on an Iraqi passport under the name of Ramzi Yousef--was involved in another stupendous bombing conspiracy. In January 1995, Yousef and his associates plotted to blow up eleven U.S. commercial aircraft in one spectacular day of terrorist rage. The bombs were to be made of a liquid explosive designed to pass through airport metal detectors. But while mixing his chemical brew in a Manila apartment, Yousef started a fire. He was forced to flee, leaving behind a computer that contained the information that led to his arrest a month later in Pakistan. Among the items found in his possession was a letter threatening Filipino interests if a comrade held in custody were not released. It claimed the "ability to make and use chemicals and poisonous gas... for use against vital institutions and residential populations and the sources of drinking water." [1] Quickly extradited, he is now in U.S. custody awaiting trial this spring.
THE WORLD TRADE CENTER BOMB: Who is Ramzi Yousef? And Why It Matters - The National Interest, Winter, 1995/96
And as far as your feelings for GWB and D.C goes
your a very sick human being, I will pray for you

Since yousef has been in custody for some time now and it is well known that his terrorist activates were not “meant as Saddam Hussein's revenge for the Gulf War” and it is well established that Bagdad did not “still secretly possesses biological warfare agents” how can one still claim this war was justified with this argument?
One could still claim it was necessary to free the people of Iraq from a dictator, but more than a million Iraqis have been killed as a direct result of U.S. intervention, I really don’t think it turned out to be in their best interests in the end.

 

[JRK]

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

Ha lo l- uh maybe because there was no weapons of mass destruction, hundreds of thousands of civilians dead, thousands of young American military men and women dead, and a once oil rich nation in ruin. Why would anyone think the Iraq War wasn't a failure?

I ask you again why is it a failure
you have provided no facts
DOD: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria « Sister Toldjah
these were to be destroyed
Since sites had been found which evidenced the destruction of chemical weaponry, UNSCOM was actively working with Iraq on methods to ascertain for certain whether the amounts destroyed matched up with the amounts that Iraq had produced.[73][74] In the next quarterly report, after the war, the total amount of proscribed items destroyed by UNMOVIC in Iraq can be gathered.[75] Those include:
50 deployed Al-Samoud 2 missiles
Various equipment, including vehicles, engines and warheads, related to the AS2 missiles
2 large propellant casting chambers
14 155 mm shells filled with mustard gas, the mustard gas totaling approximately 49 litres and still at high purity
Approximately 500 ml of thiodiglycol
Some 122 mm chemical warheads
Some chemical equipment
224.6 kg of expired growth media
So was this

let me add this
Chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix remarked in January 2003 that "Iraq appears not to have come to a genuine acceptance—not even today—of the disarmament, which was demanded of it and which it needs to carry out to win the confidence of the world and to live in peace."[117] Among other things he noted that 1,000 short tons (910 t) of chemical agent were unaccounted for, information on Iraq's VX nerve agent program was missing, and that "no convincing evidence" was presented for the destruction of 8,500 litres (1,900 imp gal; 2,200 US gal) of anthrax that had been declared.[117]

what more do you want?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Do you see George traveling much? Do you see the others traveling at all?

SNIP

You sound just like Hitler or Stalin or the other totalitarians. Basically, you argue, we can do whatever we want, and if we want, then it is right. That is Uncensored logic, and that is just stupid, and it will be fatal for the country in the long run.

That is not what we want America to be. We have to be better than that.

Leftism is the manifestation of stupidity.

I agree that the hard left is dangerous, as almost dangerous as you of The New Right. The great center of America despises both wings, and push comes to shove, will have no problem putting you all against the political wall.

You righty extreme facists are not what this country wants or needs or will ever tolerate.

 

[JRK]

The 4000+ Americans killed in Iraq vol entered to be there. you people not havfing the guts to do that should not use there sacrifice for your agenda
respect it or leave it where it lays
It was not your life to judge
It was theres

 

[JakeStarkey]

JRK has been answered repeatedly and to the point how the war was a failure.

The zombie denial by the Hard Right continues but no one of worth is listening but enjoying watching the Hard Right gyrations.

 

[deepthunk]

Simply accusing some one of reading talking points over and over is not a rational argument and does not in any way prove or disprove their assertions.

Simply posting talking points is no a rational argument and does not have merit as an assertion.

I understand that the KOS Kunts are programmed to recite certain lines, but there is no onus upon me or anyone else to lend credence to those lines.

Since you keep falling back on this simplistic tactic to sidestep the argument, I would be inclined to think you have no response but refuse to admit you are wrong.

[FONT="Book Antiqua" SIZE="2"]But his statement was true; the Bush Administration was famously unable to attain a U.N. resolution authorizing the use of military force. While that clearly did not prevent the U.S. from going to war and wasn’t necessarily politically relevant for that reason, it does lend credence to the argument that the war was unnecessary and therefore does have merit. Simply calling it a talking point does not prove otherwise.[/FONT]

 

[deepthunk]

JRK has been answered repeatedly and to the point how the war was a failure.

The zombie denial by the Hard Right continues but no one of worth is listening but enjoying watching the Hard Right gyrations.

I would agree, though I wouldn’t have used those exact words.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The 4000+ Americans killed in Iraq vol entered to be there. you people not havfing the guts to do that should not use there sacrifice for your agenda
respect it or leave it where it lays
It was not your life to judge
It was theres

What authority, you insect, do you have to tell any American what he can or cannot say about this? Do you have any idea what constitutional liberties mean? Pull your head in, snail.

You may not use our heroes sacrifice for your wicked political agenda. End of story.

 

[Unkotare]

The US did not have UN authority to carry out UN resolutions. That ends the matter. Our invasion was in violation of international laws of war. The senior Bushies will be arrested if they travel to certain parts of Europe.

And exactly which european country would arrest a former President of the United States? Not even obama would put up with that, and the consequences would last for generations. Which country is that hungry for a shit storm all on behalf of empty political posturing?

Do you see George traveling much? Do you see the others traveling at all?.

Are you allergic to logic?

 

[BlindBoo]

I am starting to see the "arrest GWB" for war crimes crowd showing up

If you believe that there is some law in this world that prevents this country to take action to either defend them selves and or to remove a regime that this country feels is in its best interest to do so, then your badly mistaken

when this event took place in congress
Senate approves Iraq war resolution - CNN
It began the path to make it legal
when this event took place in congress in 2006, it finished the path to be a legal war
Defense.gov News Article: Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says

It is so simple I cannot believe that people would for one second think this war was anything but in our best interest

Defense is one thing, aggression is another. Germany claimed it was in it's best interest to invade and occupy Polland does that make it legit?

 

[Unkotare]

You sound just like Hitler or Stalin or the other totalitarians. .

Read that back to yourself and then punch yourself in the mouth for being so unbelievably ridiculous.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I agree that the hard left is dangerous,

I don't think you're dangerous, Jake: I just think you're stupid.

as almost dangerous as you of The New Right. The great center of America despises both wings, and push comes to shove, will have no problem putting you all against the political wall.

You righty extreme facists are not what this country wants or needs or will ever tolerate.

KOS Kunts like you are easy to manipulate by those with bad intent.

 

[Unkotare]

I know you've been told to go through your list of talking points again, but we've done this several times already.

Simply accusing some one of reading talking points over and over is not a rational argument and does not in any way prove or disprove their assertions.
Since you keep falling back on this simplistic tactic to sidestep the argument, I would be inclined to think you have no response but refuse to admit you are wrong.

Posting in really, really small font does not make your empty charges any more valid, OK?


Go back 80 pages and read the same lefty talking points debunked again and again.

 

[Unkotare]

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

Ha lo l- uh maybe because there was [sic] no weapons of mass destruction

Yes there were.

 

[Unkotare]

a once oil rich nation in ruin.

It was not a rich nation, it was a rich tyrant holding millions and millions of good people hostage to terror.

 

[BlindBoo]

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

Ha lo l- uh maybe because there was [sic] no weapons of mass destruction

Yes there were.

Once again, the Bush administrations claim was that Iraq was actively producing and stockpiling massive amounts of Chemical and Biological weapons. And, was actively working on a nuclear bomb. Were new factories or new stockpiles ever found or did they just uncover some remnants of his pre-gulf war stock that had deteriorated to the point of uselessness?

 

[Unkotare]

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

Ha lo l- uh maybe because there was [sic] no weapons of mass destruction

Yes there were.

You're right, there were. Good point!

 

[JRK]

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

Ha lo l- uh maybe because there was [sic] no weapons of mass destruction

Yes there were.

Once again, the Bush administrations claim was that Iraq was actively producing and stockpiling massive amounts of Chemical and Biological weapons. And, was actively working on a nuclear bomb. Were new factories or new stockpiles ever found or did they just uncover some remnants of his pre-gulf war stock that had deteriorated to the point of uselessness?

Wonder where they got that idea from?


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

"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 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." S
- 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 Sens. 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 invigorated 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, December 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 mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the 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 weap ons 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

SO NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES???

 

[Unkotare]

Well would ya look at that!