Colin Powel tells the truth - contradicts Bush

[jimnyc]

Bush lied. He said there were WMDs in Iraq, there aren't. He said Saddam was linked to Al Qaeda, he wasn't. These were LIES.

Bush repeated intelligence gathered from around the world about WMD, not a lie. Saddam had many links to Al Qaeda and many have been provided countless times on this board. Why do you keep repeating these already failed liberal fantasies?

Clinton lied about sex, it cost no one their lives, just a lot of taxpayer money. Bush lied about Iraq, it has now cost over 1,000 american soldiers lives, the lives of many soldiers from other countries and the lives of countless Iraqi civilians (including women and children). And hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. Who is worse?

The one who sat by idly while terrorists began plans to strike America.

 

[Avatar4321]

Clinton lied about sex, it cost no one their lives, just a lot of taxpayer money. Bush lied about Iraq, it has now cost over 1,000 american soldiers lives, the lives of many soldiers from other countries and the lives of countless Iraqi civilians (including women and children). And hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. Who is worse?

acludem

Yeah Clinton lied about sex, obstructed justice, and then bombed Serbia, Aghanistan, and Iraq to distrct the people from his discretions. But then what you Dems want to ignore is that if Bush lied about Iraq, so did Clinton and Kerry.

There is no evidence that President Bush has lied about anything. Continuing to scream "Bush lied" at the top of your lungs isnt evidence. In order to believe that Bush lied, you have to believe the entire world, the Entire Democrat party, and Saddams own generals, were lying. You have to ignore vasts amounts of evidence that prove there was a link between Saddam and Al Queda, as spelled out in the 911 commission, and ignore the evidence that Saddam had the capability, facilities, and materials to create biological and chemical weapons. You have to be willing to swallow a camel to come to teh conclusion that the President lied about anything.

So the real question is was better, a President lying about sex (and youve got to have your head in the sand to believe thats all he lied about) and trying to cover it up his sins with attacks on four different nations nearly starting a World War with China, or a President who thought a ruthless dictator was a threat and felt that not taking action against him was a bigger threat than taking action.

Not only that this election gives us a choice between the President who believed Iraq was a threat to the stability of the world and a man who lied about his fellow soldiers, and who because of those lies is responsible for the death of over 21 million people in Southeast Asia who fell to communist dictators. All this for his own political power. Ironic as always your so blinded by rage against Bush that you dont see how Kerry's lies are responsible for the deaths of so many more people.

 

[007]

The statement from Colin Powell as quoted in the article was "it's getting worse" Bush's statement's were all about how things were getting better in Iraq. It's a direct contradiction. I would point out that this is not the first time that Powell has said one thing and the rest of the Bushies another.

Bush lied. He said there were WMDs in Iraq, there aren't. He said Saddam was linked to Al Qaeda, he wasn't. These were LIES.

Clinton lied about sex, it cost no one their lives, just a lot of taxpayer money. Bush lied about Iraq, it has now cost over 1,000 american soldiers lives, the lives of many soldiers from other countries and the lives of countless Iraqi civilians (including women and children). And hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars. Who is worse?

acludem

Sorry devil boy... President Bush didn't lie about ANYTHING. HE, unlike most liberals, is an HONEST MAN.

The NEW mantra here on this board aclu, is going to be "YOU LIE". I realize it's not new news to anyone here, but the TRUTH is... "YOU LIE".

 

[dilloduck]

Sorry devil boy... President Bush didn't lie about ANYTHING. HE, unlike most liberals, is an HONEST MAN.

The NEW mantra here on this board aclu, is going to be "YOU LIE". I realize it's not new news to anyone here, but the TRUTH is... "YOU LIE".

The reversion is complete. Kerry has completed the circle that loops all the way back to the 70s. Beginning his campaign by "reporting for duty" he has dragged us through the entire process of "volunteering", being "in" the war, returning "wounded", declaring it "uneccessary" and finally to the administration "lying" to the people. He has already tossed his senate seat "over the fence" and is now merely an " anti " with no alternatives. Nice try John but we've "been there,done that". All of the practicing you have done for this moment is 30 years too late !

 

[White knight]

I see what your saying Bush is sugar coating the situation and Powell is telling it strait.
Thats why I like him, he does not get behind his Administration like a good little cheer leader. I know he and Bush has had a fallen out. I think Bush would have fired him if it were not so close to the elections.
I can bet you, when Bush is re-elected he will not re-appoint Powell.
I think Powell was one of the persons he was thinking of when he said in the second debat that he has made mistakes on some appointments.

One thing I really wish people would get over is this debate about Bush lying and the war being wrong. We can't tell you the truth about why we went to war, the American people can't handle the truth. You will just have to wait and read about it in the history books.

 

[InfitiasFatalis]

Bush repeated intelligence gathered from around the world about WMD, not a lie. Saddam had many links to Al Qaeda and many have been provided countless times on this board. Why do you keep repeating these already failed liberal fantasies?




The one who sat by idly while terrorists began plans to strike America.

Only evidence officialy put out by gov for links between iraq and alqueda is small and circumstantial at best.

Your second statement is an oversimplifed spin on a very weak fact based in opinion. :scratch:

 

[Flying Duck]

I also think you underquoted Kerry. He has said several times he wouldn't have gone to war without the support of our long time allies in the world and the general concensus in the UN.

What's the underlying hypothesis here? Is it that the terrorists, murderers and radical Muslims would respect the UN and "world opinion?"

 

[InfitiasFatalis]

all you need to do is search the posts here on the board and you will see all the evidence that was reputable and posted!

fairly true yes sir evil, the fact is the majority of the members here have a conservative bent and use what seems to u as reputable sources or your very opinionated view of cnn or fox news etc, dont worry ive seen some libys here do the same thing. and from what ive seen on cnn and the other major news media stations including fox is that there are connections between europe and iraq not alqueda and iraq but ill give ya the benifit of the doubt and pay closer attention to the head lines.

 

[InfitiasFatalis]

Again you are correct sir evil.

There is no doubt that sadam needed to get taken care of. Our gov should not have supported his war against iran and G.H. Bush shoud have taken him out when the kurdish and sheit rebels took over many iraqi cities in the gulf war, and the UN and the US should have done more than sanctions and bombin in the 90s but the fact remians that things could have been handeled much better and to many independants minds kerry is the lessser of two evils in this regard. )shigh(.....if only russ fiengold or mcain would run on the same ticket