Lies just a reminder for those with memory issues

[nodoginnafight]

Bunch of trump up lies to justify an idiotic invasion. We are the idiots for taking Bush at his word and not checking under the hood a lot more carefully. Our justifiable anger and bloodlust after 9/11 made us blind to the unjustifiable.

Hmmm... was anything I posted a lie?? I will ask again, do you and ones like you understand 'terms of cease-fire'?

If you are using a violation of a UN security council resolution to justify the invasion, can you tell me how many U.N. Security Coumncil resolutions the U.S. is currently in violation of?

Does that give China a justification for invading the U.S.?

Are you trying to use a claim about the contiuation of WMD program as a violation???

Pffffffft.

Most Americans (myself included) were swayed by a lot of the BS that hindsight has shown us was based on lies, trumped up exagerations, and pure BS.

The fact that you are unable to learn from your mistakes - that your own insecurities do not allow you to admit a mistake - is very sad. You know what they say about those who refuse to learn from history .....

 

[uscitizen]

Violating terms of a cease fire is not asking for liberation.

1) Violating terms of cease-fire justifies not keeping the cease fire on the other end.... we were justified in continuing hostilities
2) In war, you generally try to eliminate the enemy and get rid of the command of the enemy.. that generally 'liberates' the general populous from that leadership as well

I did not know they still sold Sit and Spins?

 

[L.K.Eder]

What he did was pretty much explain this in an elementary way that he thought even YOU could understand
1) Iraq invaded Kuwait
2) Kuwait asked for help
3) We agreed, as well as others, to help them push back the Iraqis
4) We beat the snot out of the Iraqis
5) Iraq agreed to terms of cease fire (we still should have been allowed to finish the job in the first place, but that's a whole other argument)
6) Iraq CONTINUALLY violated the cease fire. Once the cease fire was violated, continuation of hostilities was justified
7) We went and beat the snot out of them again, finally removed Saddam and his regime, and have tried to help Iraq form as a more free nation

No spin (except for my editorial about wanting to finish it right the first time around)... just simple statements of fact

your ending of point 6 is very much debatable. nice couching. it is the crux, and the major difference between papa bush's iraq adventure and sonny bush's iraq adventure. and why sonny had only a coalition of the willing, hahahaha. but don't let me trip you up, i see you have it all figured out.

Do you understand what terms of cease-fire are??

yes.

do you understand that you cannot prove that you are not in material breach of res 687 if a powerful group decides you are. you know, in material breach because the WMD are somewhere north south east west above and under tikrit, and the favorite dessert of saddam and his evil sons is yellow cake from niger?

and do you understand why there was no vote in march 2003 after the blix report?


probably your next thing will be to claim it was not about WMD but about democracy freedom, the kurds and some action in the no fly zones.

 

[Big Fitz]

Thinking this thread needs to move to the consipracy theory forum. The looniness is reaching fever pitch.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Violating terms of a cease fire is not asking for liberation.

1) Violating terms of cease-fire justifies not keeping the cease fire on the other end.... we were justified in continuing hostilities
2) In war, you generally try to eliminate the enemy and get rid of the command of the enemy.. that generally 'liberates' the general populous from that leadership as well

I did not know they still sold Sit and Spins?

LOL - they STILL can't justify using napalm to address an infestation of terminites.

NO WMD - maybe a flyover or two ....

You CANNOT justify seismic overreaction - and it ALWAYS comes back to haunt.

Refusing to learn the lessons of history ..... tsk tsk