Bush and Officials Lied leading up to Iraq war

[RetiredGySgt]

bingo. a moron in a gunny sergeant's uniform!

At least I didn't waste money on a 4 year degree so that I could be as stupid as a 5 year old like you. Or does the Navy have 90 day wonders?

 

[maineman]

Sure thing, MORON, this from a retard that keeps making ignorant statements about what this administration has or has not done. You and Maineman need to learn the English lanaguage, the US political structure and how to comprehend evidence, facts and knowledge.

The two of you are about as stupid as they get when it comes to telling others what to talk about.

this from a guy who thought Max Cleland was a representative and not a senator?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

this from a guy who thought Max Cleland was a representative and not a senator?

So what? He wasn't my Senator or my Representative. At least I don't go around claiming I know what a President thinks and knows like a certain retard does. Further I already said it is what I thought and I might be wrong. Unlike you, that keeps claiming you KNOW what Bush thought, thinks and believes. Unlike you that keeps claiming all the Dems that said exactly what Bush said were just mistaken but Bush lied. Unlike you that keeps claiming a President somehow got the Intel community to lie to Congress and got Congress to not ask for its own briefings and intel sources. Unlike you that keeps claiming every intel agency in the world lied for Bush in the run up to the Iraq invasion.

Go ahead reminds about those super secret mind reading abilities you have.

 

[maineman]

So what? He wasn't my Senator or my Representative. At least I don't go around claiming I know what a President thinks and knows like a certain retard does. Further I already said it is what I thought and I might be wrong. Unlike you, that keeps claiming you KNOW what Bush thought, thinks and believes. Unlike you that keeps claiming all the Dems that said exactly what Bush said were just mistaken but Bush lied. Unlike you that keeps claiming a President somehow got the Intel community to lie to Congress and got Congress to not ask for its own briefings and intel sources. Unlike you that keeps claiming every intel agency in the world lied for Bush in the run up to the Iraq invasion.

Go ahead reminds about those super secret mind reading abilities you have.

If I didn't know that George Bush was the president for sure, I'd keep my piehole shut. I gave you an out, but you had to keep pressing your ignorance for all to see. your fault, not mine.

And I have NEVER claimed that the president got the intel community to lie to congress. Another LIE by the king of chickenshit liars.

My claim is that Team Bush lied when he took the intelligence he was given - which came laden with caveats and qualifiers - and claimed that that intelligence showed absolute certainty about the existence (and location) of stockpiles of Saddam's WMD's.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

If I didn't know that George Bush was the president for sure, I'd keep my piehole shut. I gave you an out, but you had to keep pressing your ignorance for all to see. your fault, not mine.

And I have NEVER claimed that the president got the intel community to lie to congress. Another LIE by the king of chickenshit liars.

My claim is that Team Bush lied when he took the intelligence he was given - which came laden with caveats and qualifiers - and claimed that that intelligence showed absolute certainty about the existence (and location) of stockpiles of Saddam's WMD's.

So you KNOW that Bush cooked the books and that he somehow prevented Congress from getting the REAL intel? That he got all the world to tell the same story for his ruse to work?

You know with no uncertainty what Bush thought and believed? Using your own logic , you are the serial liar here.

 

[maineman]

So you KNOW that Bush cooked the books and that he somehow prevented Congress from getting the REAL intel? That he got all the world to tell the same story for his ruse to work?

You know with no uncertainty what Bush thought and believed? Using your own logic , you are the serial liar here.

I have NEVER stated that.

I have only stated that Team Bush's assertions that there was absolute certainty about the presence (and location) of Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's were statements that served to convey a false impression.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I have NEVER stated that.

I have only stated that Team Bush's assertions that there was absolute certainty about the presence (and location) of Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's were statements that served to convey a false impression.

You have stated Bush lied. You have stated he KNEW what he said was wrong. You have stated he did not believe what he was saying. Now explain how you KNOW that to be true?

 

[maineman]

You have stated Bush lied. You have stated he KNEW what he said was wrong. You have stated he did not believe what he was saying. Now explain how you KNOW that to be true?

I have never stated that he did not believe what he was saying. I have stated that, based upon the statements of numerous intelligence analysts that gathered and prepared the intelligence that the president was given, none of that intelligence was without caveats and qualifiers. If one is to believe them, and I do, one can only surmise that Bush knew there was not absolute certainty, yet he and his team continually expressed absolute certainty...which was a false impression.... ergo, a lie.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

I have never stated that he did not believe what he was saying. I have stated that, based upon the statements of numerous intelligence analysts that gathered and prepared the intelligence that the president was given, none of that intelligence was without caveats and qualifiers. If one is to believe them, and I do, one can only surmise that Bush knew there was not absolute certainty, yet he and his team continually expressed absolute certainty...which was a false impression.... ergo, a lie.

You just tried to have it both ways. You tried to claim you did not state you knew what Bush believed and then repeated you DO know what Bush believed.

Your a liar by your own logic.

 

[Alpha1]

I have never stated that he did not believe what he was saying.


I have stated that, based upon the statements of numerous intelligence analysts that gathered and prepared the intelligence that the president was given, none of that intelligence was without caveats and qualifiers. If one is to believe them, and I do, one can only surmise that Bush knew there was not absolute certainty, yet he and his team continually expressed absolute certainty...which was a false impression.... ergo, a lie.

I have never stated that he did not believe what he was saying.

And their you have it in mm's own words.......

Now apply a tiny bit of standard logical thinking......

and the result is.......ta da.....

IF YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU ARE CLAIMING, IT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED A LIE.......



Now it would be nice if mm would STFU about Bush lies....once and for all.....

 

[maineman]

You just tried to have it both ways. You tried to claim you did not state you knew what Bush believed and then repeated you DO know what Bush believed.

Your a liar by your own logic.

There is a difference between knowledge and belief. I have no knowledge of the presence of God, for example, but I believe in it.

You really need to learn a little bit more about the language, moron.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

There is a difference between knowledge and belief. I have no knowledge of the presence of God, for example, but I believe in it.

You really need to learn a little bit more about the language, moron.

Wrong. You keep claiming Bush knew something and thus lied. You can not know what he knew or thought. Further complicated by your insistance that democrats that said the EXACT same things were just "mistaken" or somehow hoodwinked.

It is all about politics and partisan bullshit. Clinton did not lie when HE said what Bush said, But Bush lied. Sure thing.

 

[maineman]

I have never stated that he did not believe what he was saying.

And their you have it in mm's own words.......

Now apply a tiny bit of standard logical thinking......

and the result is.......ta da.....

IF YOU BELIEVE WHAT YOU ARE CLAIMING, IT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED A LIE.......



Now it would be nice if mm would STFU about Bush lies....once and for all.....

What President Bush wanted desperately to believe is of little interest to me.

I know what he many analysts have stated that he KNEW... and I know what he SAID, and I know that there is a dichotomy between the two.

and if you make a statement that you KNOW is incorrect, i.e. absolute certainty concerning Saddam's WMD's - even though you may very well believe that such stockpiles of WMD's do exist - your assertion of absolute certainty is a statement which conveys a false impression..... we are not talking about statements where Team Bush stated that they BELIEVED that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's...we are talking about statements by them where they stated that there was absolute certainty that such stockpiles existed - in direct contradiction to the intelligence reports that came laden with degrees of doubt and uncertainty.

 

[maineman]

Wrong. You keep claiming Bush knew something and thus lied. You can not know what he knew or thought. Further complicated by your insistance that democrats that said the EXACT same things were just "mistaken" or somehow hoodwinked.

It is all about politics and partisan bullshit. Clinton did not lie when HE said what Bush said, But Bush lied. Sure thing.

I can claim to know what he had been told, and what he had been told was that there were degrees of doubt and uncertainty about Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's.

and what democrats said is irrrelevant. I have already said that any democrat who claimed certainty was lying and is on my shitlist.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

What President Bush wanted desperately to believe is of little interest to me.

I know what he many analysts have stated that he KNEW... and I know what he SAID, and I know that there is a dichotomy between the two.

and if you make a statement that you KNOW is incorrect, i.e. absolute certainty concerning Saddam's WMD's - even though you may very well believe that such stockpiles of WMD's do exist - your assertion of absolute certainty is a statement which conveys a false impression..... we are not talking about statements where Team Bush stated that they BELIEVED that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's...we are talking about statements by them where they stated that there was absolute certainty that such stockpiles existed - in direct contradiction to the intelligence reports that came laden with degrees of doubt and uncertainty.

And you have no way in the world to know they did not believe what they said was absolutely true. Unless your a mind reader. And again when Clinton made the EXACT same speech in 1998,was lying? When Hillary and Edwards made similar speeches in 2002 and 2003 were they LYING? When German Intelligence said Saddam Hussein might have Nuclear capability by 2005 were they lying? When Hans Blix insisted he needed more time to verify if weapons were gone, was he lying?

Using the after the invasion knowledge that the weapons were not found and your logic then all of them are bald face liars. All the Dems, all the intel people, everyone, including the UN inspectors.

If on Friday I believe you have a red car and tell everyone you have a red car and then on Monday I find out you have a blue car, I did not LIE on Friday. Even if someone told me on Friday you had a blue car but others told me you had a red car. IF YOU tell me you have a red car and I accept you at your word, I am not a liar if I find out later your car is blue. Saddam told everyone he had weapons. His own Generals thought he had weapons.

 

[maineman]

And you have no way in the world to know they did not believe what they said was absolutely true. Unless your a mind reader. And again when Clinton made the EXACT same speech in 1998,was lying? When Hillary and Edwards made similar speeches in 2002 and 2003 were they LYING? When German Intelligence said Saddam Hussein might have Nuclear capability by 2005 were they lying? When Hans Blix insisted he needed more time to verify if weapons were gone, was he lying?

Using the after the invasion knowledge that the weapons were not found and your logic then all of them are bald face liars. All the Dems, all the intel people, everyone, including the UN inspectors.

If on Friday I believe you have a red car and tell everyone you have a red car and then on Monday I find out you have a blue car, I did not LIE on Friday. Even if someone told me on Friday you had a blue car but others told me you had a red car. IF YOU tell me you have a red car and I accept you at your word, I am not a liar if I find out later your car is blue. Saddam told everyone he had weapons. His own Generals thought he had weapons.

when Germany said that Saddam MIGHT have a nuclear capability by 2005, of course they were not lying. If they said that there was absolutely no doubt that Saddam would have a nuclear capability by that time, they would have been.

You cannot really be this obtuse. Are you completely incapable of seeing the difference between suggesting that Saddam might very well have WMD's and stating with absolute certainty that he did?


If you say that you believe I have a red car when I have a blue one, you are not lying. If you say that there is absolute certainty that I have a red car when, in fact, I do not, then that is a lie. comprendez?

 

[actsnoblemartin]

i thought they were ending?

Actually, the sanctions were working. The inspectors found the greatest percentage of WMDs he was hiding. If the sanctions had been lifted, we would have put in place measures to ensure he didn't reconstitute them. Your argument is just another right wing talking point.

To try and justify a pre-emptive war on a third rate dicktator who couldn't beat Iran in an 8 year war makes as much sense as saying it's okay to burn your neighbors' house down because he doesn't like you and he may be able to buy a pack of matches to burn yours down. Pre-emption is only applied by lawful countries when there is an eminent and real threat.

Saddam was no threat. Al Quaeda in Afghanistan was. Bush took his eye of of this battle and now they are back on the rise.

Your little cowboy couldn't fight his way out of a paper bag with a bayonet in each hand . They refused from the beginning to listen to any military leaders who didn't agree with them and now look at the fine kettle fish shit we are in.

Please yawn all you want. That's the common come back when you don't have data to refute the facts.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

i thought they were ending?

France tried to delay our Invasion for JUST that purpose. France, Russia and China had been bribed, they were working to end sanctions by the end of 2003.

Saddam was not worried because he thought France would sabatogue our war effort and prevent our attack. He was told that by France, Russia and China. No UN Sanctioned war and thus the US would back down.

 

[eots]

Clearly, with all of those NUKES and BIO AND CHEM WEAPONS we find all the time your paranoid, braindead fear was well worth it!


Hey, we can assume the same about ANYONE and then invade them when they dont disarm with the weapons that they DONT HAVE.


Hey, RGS... PROVE that you have stopped sucking cock. Seriously, I know you love the man meat and all and any denial is just a front meant to keep the world from knowing how much tube steak you can gobble at one setting. If you can't figure out how your answer to this relates to the PHANTOM WMD scheme then push the button for nurse Gary 'cause it's time for your meds.

wasn't rgs he also connected to baby killers? sources told me he was

 

[maineman]

yo.... retired gunny.... no comment?

when Germany said that Saddam MIGHT have a nuclear capability by 2005, of course they were not lying. If they said that there was absolutely no doubt that Saddam would have a nuclear capability by that time, they would have been.

You cannot really be this obtuse. Are you completely incapable of seeing the difference between suggesting that Saddam might very well have WMD's and stating with absolute certainty that he did?


If you say that you believe I have a red car when I have a blue one, you are not lying. If you say that there is absolute certainty that I have a red car when, in fact, I do not, then that is a lie. comprendez?