Iran--puppet master? US has 'proof' of Irans help in the insurgent community

[red states rule]

please...stop with the silly insults ...they really don't make much point, do they?

after reading how you defend the slimers of the military, I really do wonder on whose side you would be on

 

[maineman]

after reading how you defend the slimers of the military, I really do wonder on whose side you would be on

YOu are the one who mischaracterizes criticism as "sliming" I really do not wish to continue discussions with someone so incapable of intellectual thought as you whose only weapons are insults and the cut and pasted words of others. If you would like to try something different than that, I'd be all ears.

 

[red states rule]

YOu are the one who mischaracterizes criticism as "sliming" I really do not wish to continue discussions with someone so incapable of intellectual thought as you whose only weapons are insults and the cut and pasted words of others. If you would like to try something different than that, I'd be all ears.

Translation: I have spun the coments of Kerry, Kennedy, Durbin, and the others and I am tired of having my ass kicked with the truth and facts

I am taking my ball home and leaving


BTW MM, this is what, the third time you are going to ignore me. Do youmean it this time, or is this how you debate? Hit and run?

 

[maineman]

Translation: I have spun the coments of Kerry, Kennedy, Durbin, and the others and I am tired of having my ass kicked with the truth and facts

I am taking my ball home and leaving


BTW MM, this is what, the third time you are going to ignore me. Do youmean it this time, or is this how you debate? Hit and run?

I asked you if you could raise the level of debate to actually talk about things of substance and use your own thoughts and words to do so and get beyond this "libs always do________" routine. Can you?

 

[red states rule]

I asked you if you could raise the level of debate to actually talk about things of substance and use your own thoughts and words to do so and get beyond this "libs always do________" routine. Can you?

Boy, that was short

As usual, you try to dodge, deflect, and hide from your own actions. We have a long list of insults and sliming of the US military by elected Dems, and you have kissed their ass and excused their insults

There has been a long list of quotes from dems all saying Saddam had WMD's and was a threat- yet to you - they were mistaken but Pres Bush was lying

The problem with you MM is you are a typical arrogrant liberal who has little use for the facts or the truth

 

[maineman]

Boy, that was short

As usual, you try to dodge, deflect, and hide from your own actions. We have a long list of insults and sliming of the US military by elected Dems, and you have kissed their ass and excused their insults

There has been a long list of quotes from dems all saying Saddam had WMD's and was a threat- yet to you - they were mistaken but Pres Bush was lying

The problem with you MM is you are a typical arrogrant liberal who has little use for the facts or the truth

I disagree that democrats have slimed the troops.... like when Murtha said that marines had killed civilians in cold blood - which they had - he was commenting on those who had done the crime - his criticism was not of all marines.

There is not one single quote from a democrat that I know of that said they were CERTAIN that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction stockpiles... there was not a single quote from a democrat that I know of tghat said we should go in and invade Iraq prior to Hans Blix finishing his inspections...

and AGAIN...I do not speak for, nor agree with everything that every democrat says about everything and anything. I know what I, myself, was saying online about the war in Iraq and I was against it long before it began.

Why not you and I try to debate one another about these issues and not hold the other person responsible for the statements of any and every member of their own party. How about that?

 

[red states rule]

I disagree that democrats have slimed the troops.... like when Murtha said that marines had killed civilians in cold blood - which they had - he was commenting on those who had done the crime - his criticism was not of all marines.

There is not one single quote from a democrat that I know of that said they were CERTAIN that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction stockpiles... there was not a single quote from a democrat that I know of tghat said we should go in and invade Iraq prior to Hans Blix finishing his inspections...

and AGAIN...I do not speak for, nor agree with everything that every democrat says about everything and anything. I know what I, myself, was saying online about the war in Iraq and I was against it long before it began.

Why not you and I try to debate one another about these issues and not hold the other person responsible for the statements of any and every member of their own party. How about that?

Tell me again how NO DEM said Saddam has WMD's.........

“[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.”—From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, 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 refine 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.”—From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

“Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities”—From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.”—Madeline Albright, 1998

“(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983”—National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.”—Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained 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 capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability.”—Robert Byrd, October 2002

“There’s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat… Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He’s had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001… He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn’t have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.”—Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.”—Bill Clinton in 1998

“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, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. 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. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.”—Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

“Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.”—Tom Daschle in 1998

“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.”—John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.”—John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“I share the administration’s goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction.”—Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

“Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.”—Al Gore, 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.”—Bob Graham, December 2002

“Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction.”—Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.”—Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.”—Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 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.”—John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

“The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation.”—John Kerry, October 9, 2002

“(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. 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. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.”—John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

“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 mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.”—Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

“Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States.”—Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

“Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 - 1994, despite Iraq’s denials, United Nations inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons. Inspectors have said that Iraq’s claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction.”—Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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.”—Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

“Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.”—Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

“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. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources—something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.”—John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq’s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.”—John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration’s policy towards Iraq, I don’t think there can be any question about Saddam’s conduct. 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. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts.”—Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002.



Considering Saddam tossed the inspectors out of Iraq (and while there he decided when and where they wouuld "inspect")

 

[maineman]

none of those quotes indicates that any democrat was certain that saddam had stockpiles of WMD's... no democrat was demanding that we invade before Blix was through.

and Saddam had tossed the inspectors out, but in a brilliant foreign policy coup, Bush had forced him to let them back in...and Blix himself said that Saddam was cooperating...and had we waited just a little while longer, we would have known that there were no WMD's and therefore no need to invade....wouldn't that have been better?

 

[red states rule]

none of those quotes indicates that any democrat was certain that saddam had stockpiles of WMD's... no democrat was demanding that we invade before Blix was through.

and Saddam had tossed the inspectors out, but in a brilliant foreign policy coup, Bush had forced him to let them back in...and Blix himself said that Saddam was cooperating...and had we waited just a little while longer, we would have known that there were no WMD's and therefore no need to invade....wouldn't that have been better?

Can you read English or are you just being the usual asshole we all know you are?

You have put your yellow bellied party ahead of your coutry and your nations military

 

[Bullypulpit]

Listen bonehead, a leading general in saddams military stated more than once, unequivacably that he saw the weapons being move to Syria. So you are simply lying. That makes you a liar.

ANd ;you choose to ignore, as you do in all your other posistions, other factors involved. Yea, we had bad intell on WMDs to some extent. Does that mean we just stop using intell altogether? what a fucking idiotic idea.

Care to provide any independently verifiable documentation to support your assertion that weapons were moved to Syria from Iraq? Unless you can do so, with links, I should think you are the one lost in confabulation.

The Bush administration did not lack reliable intel on WMD's in Iraq "to some extent". They lacked any reliable intel, period. What they had was from members of Ahmed Chalabi's Iraqi National Congress, and let's not forget "Curveball". German intelligence warned US intelligence agencies that the man was mentally unstable, and alcoholic and a known fabricator. And, according to the Senate Select Committee's "Prewar Intelligence Assessments on Iraq", Iraq had not reconstituted a nuclear weapons program. And the conclusions drawn by the Bush administration regarding chemical and biological weapons were also based on intel from "Curveball". A history of his involvement and the dubious nature of his intel can be found <a href=http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/entity.jsp?entity=bundesnachrichtendienst>HERE</a>

Intel, to be considered reliable must come from more than one source, i.e. humint, sigint and elint, with all sources verifiable independently of each other. To be actionable, intelligence must be reliable. The Bush administration's most compelling intel was single sourced (Curveball) and unverified by other sources. It was not reliable...It was not actionable.

So, unless you are willing, and/or able, to do more than engage in childish name-calling (and I doubt either case), just cool yer jets.

 

[red states rule]

A senior Syrian journalist reports Iraq WMD located in three Syrian sites
06 January, 2004

AFP

Nizar Nayuf (Nayyouf-Nayyuf), a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to Western Europe and is known for bravely challenging the Syrian regime, said in a letter Monday, January 5, to Dutch newspaper “De Telegraaf,” that he knows the three sites where Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) are kept. The storage places are:

-1- Tunnels dug under the town of al-Baida near the city of Hama in northern Syria. These tunnels are an integral part of an underground factory, built by the North Koreans, for producing Syrian Scud missiles. Iraqi chemical weapons and long-range missiles are stored in these tunnels.

-2- The village of Tal Snan, north of the town of Salamija, where there is a big Syrian air force camp. Vital parts of Iraq's WMD are stored there.

-3-. The city of Sjinsjar on the Syrian border with the Lebanon, south of Homs city.


Nayouf writes that the transfer of Iraqi WMD to Syria was organized by the commanders of Saddam Hussein's Special Republican Guard, including General Shalish, with the help of Assif Shoakat , Bashar Assad's cousin. Shoakat is the CEO of Bhaha, an import/export company owned by the Assad family.

In February 2003, a month before America's invasion in Iraq, very few are aware about the efforts to bring the Weapons of Mass Destruction from Iraq to Syria, and the personal involvement of Bashar Assad and his family in the operation.
Nayouf, who has won prizes for journalistic integrity, says he wrote his letter because he has terminal cancer.

Click here for Satellite Images of the Syrian-Iraq's WMD Locations
http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php

 

[Bullypulpit]

Can you read English or are you just being the usual asshole we all know you are?

You have put your yellow bellied party ahead of your coutry and your nations military

So, when are you going to stop with the puerile name calling and debate the issue? Or are you so intellectually bankrupt that you can do little but point your finger and call people names?

 

[red states rule]

So, when are you going to stop with the puerile name calling and debate the issue? Or are you so intellectually bankrupt that you can do little but point your finger and call people names?

I have, and MM continues to ignore the facts

Are you going to say no Dem said Saddam had WMD's and was a threat?

 

[Bullypulpit]

A senior Syrian journalist reports Iraq WMD located in three Syrian sites
06 January, 2004

AFP

Nizar Nayuf (Nayyouf-Nayyuf), a Syrian journalist who recently defected from Syria to Western Europe and is known for bravely challenging the Syrian regime, said in a letter Monday, January 5, to Dutch newspaper “De Telegraaf,” that he knows the three sites where Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) are kept. The storage places are:

-1- Tunnels dug under the town of al-Baida near the city of Hama in northern Syria. These tunnels are an integral part of an underground factory, built by the North Koreans, for producing Syrian Scud missiles. Iraqi chemical weapons and long-range missiles are stored in these tunnels.

-2- The village of Tal Snan, north of the town of Salamija, where there is a big Syrian air force camp. Vital parts of Iraq's WMD are stored there.

-3-. The city of Sjinsjar on the Syrian border with the Lebanon, south of Homs city.


Nayouf writes that the transfer of Iraqi WMD to Syria was organized by the commanders of Saddam Hussein's Special Republican Guard, including General Shalish, with the help of Assif Shoakat , Bashar Assad's cousin. Shoakat is the CEO of Bhaha, an import/export company owned by the Assad family.

In February 2003, a month before America's invasion in Iraq, very few are aware about the efforts to bring the Weapons of Mass Destruction from Iraq to Syria, and the personal involvement of Bashar Assad and his family in the operation.
Nayouf, who has won prizes for journalistic integrity, says he wrote his letter because he has terminal cancer.

Click here for Satellite Images of the Syrian-Iraq's WMD Locations
http://www.2la.org/syria/iraq-wmd.php

Since I can find no corroboration of this piece anywhere but in right wing-nut blogs and FOX Noise, I will discount it until I find evidence from reliable sources. As for the state of Iraq's WMD program prior to the US invasion, I believe this says if all:

<blockquote>The(sic)ISG <b>has not found evidence that Saddam Husayn possessed WMD stocks in 2003</b>, but the available evidence from its investigation—including detainee interviews and document exploitation—leaves open the possibility that <i>some weapons existed in Iraq although <b>not of a militarily significant capability</b></i>. Several senior officers asserted that if Saddam had WMD available when the 2003 war began, he would have used them to avoid being overrun by Coalition forces.

* ‘Amir Hamudi Hasan Al Sa’adi told an emissary from the RG leadership, on 27 January 2003, that if Saddam had WMD, he would use it, according to a former officer with direct knowledge of Iraqi military ground operations and planning.
* According to a former senior RG official, Iraq had dismantled or destroyed all of its WMD assets and manufacturing facilities. Had Saddam possessed WMD assets, he would have used them to counter the Coalition invasion.
* If he had CW, Saddam would have used it against Coalition Forces to save the Regime, according to a former senior official.
* Iraqi military planning did not incorporate the use—or even the threat of use—of WMD after 1991, according to ‘Ali Hasan Al Majid. WMD was never part of the military plan crafted to defeat the 2003 Coalition invasion. - <a href=>Iraq Survey Group Final Report</a> (<i>emphasis mine</i>)</blockquote>

 

[Bullypulpit]

I have, and MM continues to ignore the facts

Are you going to say no Dem said Saddam had WMD's and was a threat?

The quotes you cite are, substantively, correct. However, many are taken wholly out of context and out of time. Other statements were made on the based of flawed intelligence.

Many of the quotes I can find are referring to Iraq and Saddam Hussein in 1998 and predate December 1998's <i>Operation Desert Fox</i> by some days or weeks. Others, are based upon the intelligence, the flawed, spun and/or fabricated intelligence, Chimpy and Co shared with Congress.

Out of context statements and those made on the basis of misinformation hardly constitute a damning indictment of those who made them. Although the latter can be chalked up to a disturbing lack of skepticism and backbone on the part of the Democrats who made them.

 

[trobinett]

The quotes you cite are, substantively, correct. However, many are taken wholly out of context and out of time. Other statements were made on the based of flawed intelligence.

Many of the quotes I can find are referring to Iraq and Saddam Hussein in 1998 and predate December 1998's <i>Operation Desert Fox</i> by some days or weeks. Others, are based upon the intelligence, the flawed, spun and/or fabricated intelligence, Chimpy and Co shared with Congress.

Out of context statements and those made on the basis of misinformation hardly constitute an argument.

I totally agree.

Would YOU, and the rest of the enablers please keep that fact in mind, when your putting our troops in harms way with your pathetic posts.

 

[red states rule]

The quotes you cite are, substantively, correct. However, many are taken wholly out of context and out of time. Other statements were made on the based of flawed intelligence.

Many of the quotes I can find are referring to Iraq and Saddam Hussein in 1998 and predate December 1998's <i>Operation Desert Fox</i> by some days or weeks. Others, are based upon the intelligence, the flawed, spun and/or fabricated intelligence, Chimpy and Co shared with Congress.

Out of context statements and those made on the basis of misinformation hardly constitute a damning indictment of those who made them. Although the latter can be chalked up to a disturbing lack of skepticism and backbone on the part of the Democrats who made them.

Taken out of context? They were spoken on the House and Senate florr, and I posted them completely

Taken out of context is used by libs to dodge, deflect, and provide cover for Dems when they get caught telling the truth and it looks bad on them

 

[maineman]

I have, and MM continues to ignore the facts

Are you going to say no Dem said Saddam had WMD's and was a threat?

I am going to disagree with those democrats who said that Saddam may have had WMD's...none of them EVER said it was a certainty, like Team Bush did.

No democrats ever said we needed to invade Iraq before Hans Blix finished his mission - which he was only a month or so away from accomplishing when Dubya kicked him out of the country - and had we waited - as democrats ALL were urging we do - we would have known that Saddam did NOT have any stockpiles of WMD's and that THE mission.... as per Dubya himself - THE mission, which was to disarm Saddam, was accomplished before we even began to shock and awe the Iraqi civilian populace in advance of invading and conquering their country.

 

[Bullypulpit]

I totally agree.

Would YOU, and the rest of the enablers please keep that fact in mind, when your putting our troops in harms way with your pathetic posts.

The only one putting our troops in harms way is Chimpy McPresident. I, and the many others opposed to this war, are simply trying to get them home in one piece. What, then, is your excuse?

 

[red states rule]

The only one putting our troops in harms way is Chimpy McPresident. I, and the many others opposed to this war, are simply trying to get them home in one piece. What, then, is your excuse?

Yes, libs want the troops brought home as soon as possible

So they can put on trial for war crimes