Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You are a liberal - I need know no more. You were willing to allow Saddam to continue mass murdering his population and you were willing to allow the UN sanctions to continue killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis due to starvation and lack of medication and healthcare.Got any evidence while you try to slander me?
You are a liberal - I need know no more. You were willing to allow Saddam to continue mass murdering his population and you were willing to allow the UN sanctions to continue killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis due to starvation and lack of medication and healthcare.
You are kidding I hope. It would have been a total bloodbath with al Qaeda, the Suni, the Shiites, the Kurds, the Syrians, the Saudis and the Iranians all battling it out. And liberals were willing to allow this just to embarrass Bush...would they have sacrificed more than 100,000?
You are kidding I hope. It would have been a total bloodbath with al Qaeda, the Suni, the Shiites, the Kurds, the Syrians, the Saudis and the Iranians all battling it out. And liberals were willing to allow this just to embarrass Bush...
You are a liberal - I need know no more. You were willing to allow Saddam to continue mass murdering his population and you were willing to allow the UN sanctions to continue killing hundreds of thousands of Iraqis due to starvation and lack of medication and healthcare.
you are correct about the sanctions, in regards to Clinton. However the mass murdering began when Reagan was supporting Saddam with money and weapons. Saddam didn't become a "dangerous homodical dictator" until he stopped following orders from Washington.
Yes I am correct. If you or anyone veiwing this thread want links go here:you are correct about the sanctions, in regards to Clinton. However the mass murdering began when Reagan was supporting Saddam with money and weapons. Saddam didn't become a "dangerous homodical dictator" until he stopped following orders from Washington.
You are kidding I hope. It would have been a total bloodbath with al Qaeda, the Suni, the Shiites, the Kurds, the Syrians, the Saudis and the Iranians all battling it out. And liberals were willing to allow this just to embarrass Bush...
Psst, don't throw facts out there. It fucks with his brain that a Republican might of done something wrong.
You mean until they didn't support the war...you mean liberals like Biden, Hillary, and Emanuel, who supported this war?
You already admitted that at one time you were willing to pull out. Obama wanted to pull out. You both wanted to surrender. You both didn't give a shit how many lives that would cost, just as long as Bush was seen as defeated.And this is why your posts have no standing.
I think what Saddam was doing was highly wrong. However, I don't see your anger at the Bush Administration over not stepping in for what's going on Darfur.
Besides, the U.S. is not the world's police.
You mean until they didn't support the war...
I was talking about pulling out before the surge you dimwit. Obama and you were both willing to accept a bloodbath to have Bush seen as defeated.I see you didn't read my link.
Look at Elvis's post above first off.
Secondly, Al Qaeda was NOT IN IRAQ UNTIL WE INVADED. Bush has even admitted this. What do you not get about this?
Iraq has become a terrorist hotbed because we invaded.
The Sunnis and Shiites have also been fighting for years if you haven't realized it.
And the Saudis? According to Bush those are our allies.
"We know they have WMD's, because we have the receipts."
You already admitted that at one time you were willing to pull out. Obama wanted to pull out. You both wanted to surrender. You both didn't give a shit how many lives that would cost, just as long as Bush was seen as defeated.
So what? They along with Obama were willing to pull out and allow Iraq to descend into a bloodbath just to embarrass Bush. I've repeated this many times - I give up trying to get through to you...They stopped supporting the war because it was no longer politically intelligent for democrats to do so. You accused "all liberals" of wanting to surrender. These individuals I mentioned were hawks well after it was obvious there were no weapons/no 911 connection, etc.
So what? They along with Obama were willing to pull out and allow Iraq to descend into a bloodbath just to embarrass Bush. I've repeated this many times - I give up trying to get through to you...
Oh shit, no wonder you don't understand anything - you're just a kid. Come back when you've grown up...Yes, at first; at the age of 13. I didn't understand the military or politics fully at that time until a year or so later.
Got a problem with that Gord?
I never wanted to surrender and I surely care about how many lives would be lost
I think you have watched too much Fox News.
Oh shit, no wonder you don't understand anything - you're just a kid. Come back when you've grown up...