Bush's Lies Caused The Iraq War

[NotfooledbyW]

Republican Reality Check RRC


BL 9866405 KZ 9866331

.

People hear what they want to hear.........

In fact, in his speech announcing the killing of Osama bin Laden, Obama warned that the U.S. needs to “remain vigilant” because “al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us.”

Obama, May 1, 2011: The death of bin Laden marks the most significant achievement to date in our nation’s effort to defeat al Qaeda. Yet his death does not mark the end of our effort. There’s no doubt that al Qaeda will continue to pursue attacks against us. We must –- and we will — remain vigilant at home and abroad.

Since that time, Obama has repeatedly warned of the ongoing terrorist threat posed by al Qaeda and its affiliates.

Some examples:

“Now, make no mistake, our nation is still threatened by terrorists. From Benghazi to Boston, we have been tragically reminded of that truth.” — Obama at theNational Defense University on May 23, 2013.

“For the foreseeable future, the most direct threat to America, at home and abroad, remains terrorism, but a strategy that involves invading every country that harbors terrorist networks is naive and unsustainable.” — Obama delivering thecommencement address at West Point on May 28, 2014.

“Violent extremism is still out there, and we have got to stay on top of it.” — Obama on “The Tonight Show with Jay Leno,” Aug. 7, 2013.

“The fact is, that danger remains. While we have put al Qaeda’s core leadership on a path to defeat, the threat has evolved, as al Qaeda affiliates and other extremists take root in different parts of the world.” — Obama in his State of the Union Address on Jan. 28, 2014.

Did Obama Declare Terrorist Threat 8216 Gone 8217
​

 

[Dot Com]

Repub-voting dupes just don't get it. Repubs start wars to enrich their defense contractor campaign contributors and promises of future *cough* "employment" from the bomb-makers.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

9298376

Ummm, the Iraq war began in 1991. Sorry.

No it didnt. Operation Iraqi Freedom began on March 19, 2003 when after Bush 43 told the UN inspectors to get out. That was the war over WMD that turned into a bloody sectarian conflict. That US war ended in December 2011.

There are now four phases of US military operations involving Iraq.

• The first Gulf War. Done quite Well.
• The NFZ enforcement period including Operation Desert Fox.
• The Bush/Cheney invasion/occupation. The Dumb War.
• Current air campaign at Iraq's request.

 

[Ibentoken]

9298376

Ummm, the Iraq war began in 1991. Sorry.

No it didnt. Operation Iraqi Freedom began on March 19, 2003 when after Bush 43 told the UN inspectors to get out. That was the war over WMD that turned into a bloody sectarian conflict. That US war ended in December 2011.

There are now four phases of US military operations involving Iraq.

• The first Gulf War. Done quite Well.
• The NFZ enforcement period including Operation Desert Fox.
• The Bush/Cheney invasion/occupation. The Dumb War.
• Current air campaign at Iraq's request.

Nope. The Iraq war that began in 1991 never ended. There was a cease fire, never a surrender. There were UN conditions of the cease fire that were violated which led eventually to the invasion.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Good grief... not this stupid shit again.

<<facepalm>>

 

[NotfooledbyW]

IB 10006514 regarding NF 10006482, IB 9298376

Nope. The Iraq war that began in 1991 never ended. There was a cease fire, never a surrender. There were UN conditions of the cease fire that were violated which led eventually to the invasion.

So in your view here it was UN conditions for Saddam Hussein's surrender agreement, ceasefire, and withdrawal from Kuwait that you are claiming to have been violated in the aftermath of UNSC Resolution 1441?

The UNSC never did determine that Iraq was in violation of 1441. So where do you come up with your mistaken belief that Iraq violated 1441? That November 2002 UNSC Resolution granted Iraq the opportunity to become in compliance with all resolutions that were passed before it.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

GS005 9298331

There is no evidence Bush lied. But you keep pedaling THAT lie.

That is easily refuted nonsense. Bush lied about France and other members on the UNSC. This lie came on March 27, 2003.

For the last four-and-a-half months, the United States and our allies have worked within the Security Council to enforce that Council's long-standing demands. Yet, some permanent members of the Security Council have publicly announced they will veto any resolution that compels the disarmament of Iraq.

It is a lie for two reasons. First it never came to a French veto because Bush could not find enough of the fifteen Security Council Members that would promise to pass a UNSC authorization to use military force against Iraq instead of continued support for the UNSC inspection process. The second reason is that the French, Russians and Chinese permanent members of the UNSC saw the threat of US military force had already compelled a satisfactory process toward the full and final disarmament of Iraq. The French very clearly supported the disarmament of Iraq, but they did not support the use of force unless the inspection process were to fail. That process was not failing and the majority on the UNSC believed that to be the case. Bush lied... 100,000 of thousands died and continue to die because of Bush's decision to lie and then invade. .

 

[NotfooledbyW]

IB724 10006514 regarding NF 10006482, IB 9298376

Nope. The Iraq war that began in 1991 never ended. There was a cease fire, never a surrender. There were UN conditions of the cease fire that were violated which led eventually to the invasion.

NF726 10006811 regarding IB724 10006514

So in your view here it was UN conditions for Saddam Hussein's surrender agreement, ceasefire, and withdrawal from Kuwait that you are claiming to have been violated in the aftermath of UNSC Resolution 1441? <> The UNSC never did determine that Iraq was in violation of 1441. So where do you come up with your mistaken belief that Iraq violated 1441? That November 2002 UNSC Resolution granted Iraq the opportunity to become in compliance with all resolutions that were passed before it.

I see that Ibentoken has made no attempt to respond or refute my factual explanation as to why his comment is wrong.