D-Day Disgrace

[PoliticalChic]

[

The United States never used the Japanese torture method that you are attempting to claim.

Never.

The basic Japanese approach was to force ingestion of large amounts of water, then beat your distended stomach, causing pain and rupture of organs.

It was not the mental panic approach that we call waterboarding today.

Lets find ANY journalists or anyone making a comparison between our waterboarding and that of the Japanese actually including ruptured organs.

The United States method was more correctly compared to the college game of Chug-a-Lug.

Any who attempt to conflate the US interrogation with the torture used by the Japanese is a lying bottom-feeding sack of offal.

Raise your paw.

Hmmm.

About the author of hte article...

Evan Wallach, a judge at the U.S. Court of International Trade in New York, teaches the law of war as an adjunct professor at Brooklyn Law School and New York Law School.

Yup, sounds like a sack of offal to me. A really accomplished sack of offal.

Okay, if you really want to try to claim that the waterboarding practiced by the Japanese wasn't (sorry, it was.) Let's try this one.

More recently, waterboarding cases have appeared in U.S. district courts. One was a civil action brought by several Filipinos seeking damages against the estate of former Philippine president Ferdinand Marcos. The plaintiffs claimed they had been subjected to torture, including water torture. The court awarded $766 million in damages, noting in its findings that "the plaintiffs experienced human rights violations including, but not limited to . . . the water cure, where a cloth was placed over the detainee's mouth and nose, and water producing a drowning sensation."

In 1983, federal prosecutors charged a Texas sheriff and three of his deputies with violating prisoners' civil rights by forcing confessions. The complaint alleged that the officers conspired to "subject prisoners to a suffocating water torture ordeal in order to coerce confessions. This generally included the placement of a towel over the nose and mouth of the prisoner and the pouring of water in the towel until the prisoner began to move, jerk, or otherwise indicate that he was suffocating and/or drowning."

Sorry, Waterboarding is torture. No amount of Orwelling backflipping is going to make it otherwise.

"Sorry,...."

You should be.


Here's the American version of waterboarding.....with milk:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a7lmLNTiD3A]Nebraska teen wins round of Iowa State Fair Milk Chug-a-Lug - YouTube[/ame]

 

[JoeB131]

The reason why HIllary isn't president now is because she let Bush steamroll her into going along with his foolish war.

If your best argument is 'Well, you all thought he had weapons, too!", that's not much of an argument. Iraq was a huge screwup, and there's no way you are ever putting lipstick on that pig.

So you've ignored post #174.

I can see why you would.

No, I didn't ignore it.

I just thought it was stupid.

Hey, I'll say it. A lot of those Democrats were cowards. They looked at polls, they didn't want to end up like Max Cleland getting voted out for not hating Arabs enough, and they went along with a policy.

Maybe they figured the war would be over in a couple of weeks, and they could go back to bashing Bush on his incompetence in handling the economy.

They probably had no idea how badly Bush would fuck it up.

 

[rightwinger]

How about these guys?

"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




"Who is it you call a disgrace?"

You.

Guess who was right about the Iraq invasion? You know " community organizer". Who saw through all the bullshit being thrown by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz? You know the "community organizer" Who was it that eventually killed Osama bin Laden? You know....the "community organizer"

So....you're changing the subject?


That means I win,....right?

I thought the subject was who was a "D Day Disgrace"?

It obviously isn't President Obama

 

[PoliticalChic]

The reason why HIllary isn't president now is because she let Bush steamroll her into going along with his foolish war.

If your best argument is 'Well, you all thought he had weapons, too!", that's not much of an argument. Iraq was a huge screwup, and there's no way you are ever putting lipstick on that pig.

So you've ignored post #174.

I can see why you would.

No, I didn't ignore it.

I just thought it was stupid.

Hey, I'll say it. A lot of those Democrats were cowards. They looked at polls, they didn't want to end up like Max Cleland getting voted out for not hating Arabs enough, and they went along with a policy.

Maybe they figured the war would be over in a couple of weeks, and they could go back to bashing Bush on his incompetence in handling the economy.

They probably had no idea how badly Bush would fuck it up.

"I just thought it was stupid.

Hey, I'll say it. A lot of those Democrats were cowards."


So....did you vote for those cowards?

Does that make you stupid?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Who was it who "thought they might have WMDs?"


Oh....right....everyone.

Everyone?

How about this guy?

. I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power…. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors…and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that…we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

Barack Obama Oct 2 2002



Who is it you call a disgrace?

How about these guys?

"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




"Who is it you call a disgrace?"

You.

Then why were there 147 votes against the Iraq war resolution (and those 147 turned out to be the right vote)

if 'everyone' was convinced Saddam Hussein was a sufficient threat to US vital interests to warrant invasion?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Everyone?

How about this guy?

. I don’t oppose all wars. What I am opposed to is a dumb war. What I am opposed to is a rash war. What I am opposed to is the cynical attempt by Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz and other armchair, weekend warriors in this administration to shove their own ideological agendas down our throats, irrespective of the costs in lives lost and in hardships borne. What I am opposed to is the attempt by political hacks like Karl Rove to distract us from a rise in the uninsured, a rise in the poverty rate, a drop in the median income, to distract us from corporate scandals and a stock market that has just gone through the worst month since the Great Depression.

That’s what I’m opposed to. A dumb war. A rash war. A war based not on reason but on passion, not on principle but on politics.

Now let me be clear: I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power…. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him. But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors…and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

I know that even a successful war against Iraq will require a U.S. occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences. I know that an invasion of Iraq without a clear rationale and without strong international support will only fan the flames of the Middle East, and encourage the worst, rather than best, impulses of the Arab world, and strengthen the recruitment arm of al-Qaeda.

I am not opposed to all wars. I’m opposed to dumb wars. So for those of us who seek a more just and secure world for our children, let us send a clear message to the president.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s finish the fight with Bin Laden and al-Qaeda, through effective, coordinated intelligence, and a shutting down of the financial networks that support terrorism, and a homeland security program that involves more than color-coded warnings.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure that…we vigorously enforce a nonproliferation treaty, and that former enemies and current allies like Russia safeguard and ultimately eliminate their stores of nuclear material, and that nations like Pakistan and India never use the terrible weapons already in their possession, and that the arms merchants in our own country stop feeding the countless wars that rage across the globe.

You want a fight, President Bush? Let’s fight to make sure our so-called allies in the Middle East, the Saudis and the Egyptians, stop oppressing their own people, and suppressing dissent, and tolerating corruption and inequality, and mismanaging their economies so that their youth grow up without education, without prospects, without hope, the ready recruits of terrorist cells.

Barack Obama Oct 2 2002



Who is it you call a disgrace?

How about these guys?

"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




"Who is it you call a disgrace?"

You.

Then why were there 147 votes against the Iraq war resolution (and those 147 turned out to be the right vote)

if 'everyone' was convinced Saddam Hussein was a sufficient threat to US vital interests to warrant invasion?

So.....no Dodo?

 

[JoeB131]

[

"I just thought it was stupid.

Hey, I'll say it. A lot of those Democrats were cowards."


So....did you vote for those cowards?

Does that make you stupid?

Again, I don't base my vote on any one issue.

I base my vote on who is going to act in my best interest.

And for those playing along at home, I voted Republican until about 2008 or so, when my Ex-Boss showed me the true meaning of Christmas.

NOw, yeah, I think Hillary was a gutless coward when she voted for the war resolution and wrote Bush a blank check.

But if the choice in 2016 comes down between her and Bush's idiot brother, that's a no-brainer. She'd clearly be the lesser of two evils.

And that would pretty much apply to anyone else in the GOP clown car.

 

[Misty]

The reason why HIllary isn't president now is because she let Bush steamroll her into going along with his foolish war.

If your best argument is 'Well, you all thought he had weapons, too!", that's not much of an argument. Iraq was a huge screwup, and there's no way you are ever putting lipstick on that pig.

So Hillary is that easily tricked? By dumb ole Bush?

It wasn't just our government claiming saddam had wmds it was world leaders as well.

It wasn't as big a screw up as you think. Saddam and his two evil sons are dead and Iraqis got a chance to experience democracy.

 

[HenryBHough]

Hillary can remember that ever was a president named Bush?

Or, for that matter, what she had for breakfast.

 

[Misty]

Will Bush be forgiven as easily as Hillary Clinton?

"Former U.S. President George W. Bush apologized for the Iraq War today, saying the conflict was "his biggest mistake."
In a statement released to a Texas newspaper, the 66-year-old Bush said he meant well when he sent America to war but asked the American people to forgive what in retrospect was "a clear example of poor judgement."

 

[Redfish]

[

We waterboarded 3 terrorists murderers. Yes, KSM got it multiple times, and he is surviving just fine------------torture? I think not.

We also do it routinely to american military recruits as part of their training. Are you saying that obama is allowing the torture of american military personnel?

Sorry, I was in for 11 years and never got waterboarded once.

And Khalid never produced a single bit of actionable intelligence. If anything, his waterboarding probably hurt efforts.

Under Waterboarding, Khalid said that the "courier" that Bin Laden was using was no longer in Al Qaeda and wasn't anyone important. Maybe if we didn't follow this false lead, we'd have gotten bin Laden a lot earlier.

horseshit

 

[PoliticalChic]

The reason why HIllary isn't president now is because she let Bush steamroll her into going along with his foolish war.

If your best argument is 'Well, you all thought he had weapons, too!", that's not much of an argument. Iraq was a huge screwup, and there's no way you are ever putting lipstick on that pig.

So Hillary is that easily tricked? By dumb ole Bush?

It wasn't just our government claiming saddam had wmds it was world leaders as well.

It wasn't as big a screw up as you think. Saddam and his two evil sons are dead and Iraqis got a chance to experience democracy.

And this joke:

 

[rightwinger]

The reason why HIllary isn't president now is because she let Bush steamroll her into going along with his foolish war.

If your best argument is 'Well, you all thought he had weapons, too!", that's not much of an argument. Iraq was a huge screwup, and there's no way you are ever putting lipstick on that pig.

So Hillary is that easily tricked? By dumb ole Bush?

It wasn't just our government claiming saddam had wmds it was world leaders as well.

It wasn't as big a screw up as you think. Saddam and his two evil sons are dead and Iraqis got a chance to experience democracy.

What really happened is that after 9-11 we gave Bush a 9-11 Card to do whatever he wanted to fight terrorism

Bush wanted the Patriot Act ....we gave it to him
Homeland Security?........we gave it to him
Invade Afghanistan........we gave it to him

Any politician who resisted was branded unpatriotic

So......how does Bush use his 9-11 card to invade Iraq? Easy.....claim Saddam is going to give WMDs to terrorists. Don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud do we?

Most Democrats voted against the Iraq invasion but some were afraid to resist the Bush 9-11 card. It was the last time he was allowed to use it

 

[Camp]

If an FDR clone had been President on 9/11 gas would be .99 per gal, all our kids cheap toys would be made in countries whose names end in 'stan, most the Muslims in the world would have converted to Christianity, Saudi Arabia would be a tourist destination for ATV enthusiast and the western Israeli beaches. A generation of soldiers would be going to college at the fed's expense and getting jobs when they graduated. The Arab world would be buying American made products for the next couple of decades to pay off the expense of saving the cooperative ones or conquering the uncooperative ones.

 

[NYcarbineer]

How about these guys?

"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




"Who is it you call a disgrace?"

You.

Then why were there 147 votes against the Iraq war resolution (and those 147 turned out to be the right vote)

if 'everyone' was convinced Saddam Hussein was a sufficient threat to US vital interests to warrant invasion?

So.....no Dodo?

You kept yakking about your post above and now you can't defend it.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The reason why HIllary isn't president now is because she let Bush steamroll her into going along with his foolish war.

If your best argument is 'Well, you all thought he had weapons, too!", that's not much of an argument. Iraq was a huge screwup, and there's no way you are ever putting lipstick on that pig.

So you've ignored post #174.

I can see why you would.

Pointing out that some Democrats were wrong about Iraq when more Republicans than Democrats were wrong about Iraq is a weak-ass defense of Republicans, in fact,

it's more an indictment of Republicans than a defense.

I knew years ago that the pro-war Right had quietly, grudgingly admitted to themselves that Iraq was a disastrous mistake

when they started trying to blame the decision to go to war on the Democrats.

 

[rightwinger]

Bush gambled with our soldiers and lost big time

He thought he could send the mightiest Army on earth into Iraq and the Iraq Army would collapse after offering a token fight. Once that happened the Iraqi people would treat us as liberators and Bush would be a savior

Bushs advisors did a horrible job of anticipating the expected Civil War and it cost us 5000 lives

THAT is what a disgrace is

 

[HenryBHough]

Bush gambled with our soldiers and lost big time

He thought he could send the mightiest Army on earth into Iraq and the Iraq Army would collapse after offering a token fight. Once that happened the Iraqi people would treat us as liberators and Bush would be a savior

Bushs advisors did a horrible job of anticipating the expected Civil War and it cost us 5000 lives

THAT is what a disgrace is

And that Your New Messiah learned naught from the example is somehow heroic, right?

 

[rightwinger]

Bush gambled with our soldiers and lost big time

He thought he could send the mightiest Army on earth into Iraq and the Iraq Army would collapse after offering a token fight. Once that happened the Iraqi people would treat us as liberators and Bush would be a savior

Bushs advisors did a horrible job of anticipating the expected Civil War and it cost us 5000 lives

THAT is what a disgrace is

And that Your New Messiah learned naught from the example is somehow heroic, right?

Actually, our Messiah was spot on in his assessment of Iraq. If only Bush had listened to our Messiah Obama instead of GOP Messiah Cheney

 

[HenryBHough]

Bush gambled with our soldiers and lost big time

He thought he could send the mightiest Army on earth into Iraq and the Iraq Army would collapse after offering a token fight. Once that happened the Iraqi people would treat us as liberators and Bush would be a savior

Bushs advisors did a horrible job of anticipating the expected Civil War and it cost us 5000 lives

THAT is what a disgrace is

And that Your New Messiah learned naught from the example is somehow heroic, right?

Actually, our Messiah was spot on in his assessment of Iraq. If only Bush had listened to our Messiah Obama instead of GOP Messiah Cheney

Which is why Gitmo was closed and all the troops were brought home from Iraq and Afghanistan exactly as promised, right on schedule, January 21st, 2009.