sanctions

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by jimnyc
I have yet to see on quote attributed to George Bush showing he ever stated Iraq was an "imminent threat".

OK... Let's try to address this 1 statement at a time.... So that we can stay on topic...

Are you trying to say Bush and his regime never used the word "imminent"?

Or

Are you trying to say that the Bush regime never relayed the threat from Iraq as imminent as defined by the word?

2 questions....
2 answers....

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
OK... Let's try to address this 1 statement at a time.... So that we can stay on topic...

Are you trying to say Bush and his regime never used the word "imminent"?

Or

Are you trying to say that the Bush regime never relayed the threat from Iraq as imminent as defined by the word?

2 questions....
2 answers....

Nothing to address. I think I was very clear. Many keep stating that Bush said Iraq was an "imminent threat", and that's just not true. If people are going to quote Bush, they should actually quote what he said and not their interpretations.

 

[LoneVoice]

LOL... 2 questions.... 2 answers.... and you avoided them both...
LOL

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
LOL... 2 questions.... 2 answers.... and you avoided them both...
LOL

I've answered this question so many times already. The burden of proof is on you. You want to claim Bush said Iraq was an imminent threat, PROVE IT!

You cannot do it. Why do liberals have such a hard time facing the truth? Very sad.

 

[jimnyc]

Also, why are you not responding to your ridiculous comments about David Kay? The proof provided too much for you to handle?

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by jimnyc
I've answered this question so many times already. The burden of proof is on you. You want to claim Bush said Iraq was an imminent threat, PROVE IT!

You cannot do it. Why do liberals have such a hard time facing the truth? Very sad.

I'm trying to get you to clarify the point.

Are we talking about finding examples of the word "imminent" used by the Bush regime?

Or

Are we trying to find examples of what's imminent (by definition)?

 

[lilcountriegal]

Clarify the point, hell. You're trying to dance around the issue.

You quoted Bush as saying Iraq was an imminent threat. Jim, and everyone else following this thread, wants you to produce a quote from Bush (not Rumsfield. Not Powell. Not Cheney. Bush) where he specifically calls Iraq an imminent threat, not where you decide what he means is imminent.

To dumb it down a tad....

please provide a quote, from Bush, with the words "imminent" and "thread" side-by-side in a sentence.

Thank you.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
I'm trying to get you to clarify the point.

Are we talking about finding examples of the word "imminent" used by the Bush regime?

Bush himself used the word, but he said "we should not wait until the threat is imminent". 9 out of 10 posters will claim Bush said Iraq was an imminent threat, which is just outright false.

I believe a few in the Bush administration used the word imminent when questioned, and their answers were clearly in reference to the Middle East region. There were a few who stated that Iraq was a growing threat, and that threat was to the entire ME and the USA alike. Nobody inferred their was any type of immediate danger towards the USA.

Are we trying to find examples of what's imminent (by definition)?

Again, look above for the one and only time Bush used the word "imminent" and you'll find any attempts to claim he said Iraq was an imminent threat is false. You can interpret what a few in the administration said was a grave threat of impending threat any way you like, but that much was true - and backed up by David Kay's testimony.

The threat that was mentioned was complete and accurate with the intelligence.

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by lilcountriegal
Clarify the point, hell. You're trying to dance around the issue.

You quoted Bush as saying Iraq was an imminent threat. Jim, and everyone else following this thread, wants you to produce a quote from Bush (not Rumsfield. Not Powell. Not Cheney. Bush) where he specifically calls Iraq an imminent threat, not where you decide what he means is imminent.

To dumb it down a tad....

please provide a quote, from Bush, with the words "imminent" and "thread" side-by-side in a sentence.

Thank you.

OK... First of all, if you look through this thread I have never quoted Bush as saying Iraq was an imminent threat. I have always said the Bush regime.

I've done searches and it looks as though George Bush didn't use the exact words, "imminent threat". He did make numerous statements, which in effect relayed that message. (But of course you'll try to argue against that, since he didn't use the exact words).

The Bush regime as a whole did make it clear that Iraq was an "imminent threat". That part could definitely be proven with facts.

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
The Bush regime as a whole did make it clear that Iraq was an "imminent threat". That part could definitely be proven with facts.

Yes, one could make that argument. And you'll find that Iraq was in fact an "imminent" threat to the region, especially if left unattended. Read Kay's testimony and you'll see he completely backs up this assertion.

Of course some liberals will try to redefine what was said and claim the administration claimed Iraq was an imminent threat to the USA.

So, when left in it's original context, their statements are correct.

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by jimnyc
Of course some liberals will try to redefine what was said and claim the administration claimed Iraq was an imminent threat to the USA.

So, when left in it's original context, their statements are correct.

Looks like they were really claiming this about the administration.

"There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein."
• President Bush, 10/28/02

"I see a significant threat to the security of the United States in Iraq."
• President Bush, 11/1/02

"Saddam Hussein is a threat to America."
• President Bush, 11/3/02

Iraq is "a serious threat to our country, to our friends and to our allies."
• Vice President Dick Cheney, 1/31/03

"This is about imminent threat."
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03

"The people of the United States and our friends and allies will not live at the mercy of an outlaw regime that threatens the peace with weapons of mass murder."
• President Bush, 3/19/03

"Saddam Hussein is no longer a threat to the United States because we removed him, but he was a threat...He was a threat. He's not a threat now."
• President Bush, 7/2/03

Iraq "threatens the United States of America."
• Vice President Cheney, 1/30/03

"Saddam Hussein possesses chemical and biological weapons. Iraq poses a threat to the security of our people and to the stability of the world that is distinct from any other. It's a danger to its neighbors, to the United States, to the Middle East and to the international peace and stability. It's a danger we cannot ignore. Iraq and North Korea are both repressive dictatorships to be sure and both pose threats. But Iraq is unique. In both word and deed, Iraq has demonstrated that it is seeking the means to strike the United States and our friends and allies with weapons of mass destruction."

• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/20/03
"Iraq poses a serious and mounting threat to our country. His regime has the design for a nuclear weapon, was working on several different methods of enriching uranium, and recently was discovered seeking significant quantities of uranium from Africa."
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 1/29/03

"There's no question that Iraq was a threat to the people of the United States."
• White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan, 8/26/03


http://www.americanprogress.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=24970

 

[jimnyc]

And each and every one of those quotes is corect. What little is in doubt was due to faulty intelligence. What seems to be the problem?

Thank you for unwittingly proving my point!

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by jimnyc
And each and every one of those quotes is corect. What little is in doubt was due to faulty intelligence. What seems to be the problem?

Thank you for unwittingly proving my point!

So, are you, or are you not saying that Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United States?

 

[jimnyc]

Originally posted by LoneVoice
So, are you, or are you not saying that Iraq posed an imminent threat to the United States?

Why pose questions about something that wasn't said? Are you really this bad at comprehension? You just laid out all your own quotes and not one of them show anyone saying Iraq was an imminent threat the the USA.

It's very sad that you can't make your points based on facts but would rather make up words that just aren't there.

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by jimnyc


Yes, one could make that argument. And you'll find that Iraq was in fact an "imminent" threat to the region, especially if left unattended. Read Kay's testimony and you'll see he completely backs up this assertion.

Of course some liberals will try to redefine what was said and claim the administration claimed Iraq was an imminent threat to the USA.

So, when left in it's original context, their statements are correct.


You're talking out of both sides of your arse. You talk about Iraq being an "imminent" threat to the region only.

Then you say that liberals are redefinining it to say "imminent" threat to the USA.

Then you look at those quotes, where the Bush administration is declaring Iraq's "imminent" threat to USA and now you agree with them and the liberals.


You just laid out all your own quotes and not one of them show anyone saying Iraq was an imminent threat the the USA.

That's flat out wrong. All those quotes relayed the perspective of the Bush regime and their view of the threat from Iraq.

Are you trying to play semantic games, or are you able to connect the dots?

"This is about imminent threat."
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03

"There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein."
• President Bush, 10/28/02

"I see a significant threat to the security of the United States in Iraq."
• President Bush, 11/1/02

"Saddam Hussein is a threat to America."
• President Bush, 11/3/02

 

[jimnyc]

You're talking out of both sides of your arse. You talk about Iraq being an "imminent" threat to the region only.

Then you say that liberals are redefinining it to say "imminent" threat to the USA.

Then you look at those quotes, where the Bush administration is declaring Iraq's "imminent" threat to USA and now you agree with them and the liberals.

No, it doesn't say anywhere that Iraq was an imminent threat to the USA. I find it hard to believe that anyone could even infer that from those quotes.

"This is about imminent threat."
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03

In reference to the overall threat to the ME region and our allies.

"There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein."
• President Bush, 10/28/02

Nothing about an imminent threat to the USA. Saddam was in fact a threat, and especially so if left unattended.

"I see a significant threat to the security of the United States in Iraq."
• President Bush, 11/1/02

As did David Kay. The threat was growing more and more as time passed. This still doesn't say Iraq was an imminent threat.

"Saddam Hussein is a threat to America."
• President Bush, 11/3/02

And he was, as well as many other countries. Where's the imminent threat part though?

Twist, twist, twist!! You still have absolutely nothing! Don't you grow tired of being proved wrong in nearly every post you make?

 

[tim_duncan2000]

jimnyc

I guess David Kay must have been in on it too then?

 

[LoneVoice]

Originally posted by jimnyc
No, it doesn't say anywhere that Iraq was an imminent threat to the USA. I find it hard to believe that anyone could even infer that from those quotes.

"This is about imminent threat."
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 2/10/03

In reference to the overall threat to the ME region and our allies.


You're right about this part... it refers to the ME region....

"There is real threat, in my judgment, a real and dangerous threat to American in Iraq in the form of Saddam Hussein."
• President Bush, 10/28/02

Nothing about an imminent threat to the USA. Saddam was in fact a threat, and especially so if left unattended.

Actually.... by definition this says imminent threat... You're really desperately trying to split semantical hairs on that one.

"I see a significant threat to the security of the United States in Iraq."
• President Bush, 11/1/02

As did David Kay. The threat was growing more and more as time passed. This still doesn't say Iraq was an imminent threat.


Once again.... by definition.... this does say imminent threat....

"Saddam Hussein is a threat to America."
• President Bush, 11/3/02

And he was, as well as many other countries. Where's the imminent threat part though?

Twist, twist, twist!! You still have absolutely nothing! Don't you grow tired of being proved wrong in nearly every post you make?

Once again.... you're desperately splitting hairs on this matter...

You're trying to be very semantical with regards to actually saying the exact words "imminent", "Iraq", and "US" all in one precise sentence. You still won't even connect the dots, where all of this is said...


But there can be no peace if our security depends on the will and whims of a ruthless and aggressive dictator. I'm not willing to stake one American life on trusting Saddam Hussein.

Our demands are directed only at the regime that enslaves them and threatens us.

The attacks of September the 11th showed our country that vast oceans no longer protect us from danger... Today in Iraq, we see a threat whose outlines are far more clearly defined, and whose consequences could be far more deadly. Saddam Hussein's actions have put us on notice, and there is no refuge from our responsibilities.

•For Immediate Release
Office of the Press Secretary
October 7, 2002


"No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq," Rumsfeld testified to lawmakers in September 2002.

Another example, which clearly makes the statement, but I'm sure you won't be able to connect the dots there.

On January 26, 2003, CNN television asked White House communications director Dan Bartlett "is he (Saddam) an imminent threat to US interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?"

"Well, of course he is," Bartlett replied.

That's a clear and direct statement.... but once again you'll try to squeeze out of that as well....


On May 7, 2003, a reporter asked then White House spokesman Ari Fleischer: "We went to war, didn't we, to find these – because we said that these weapons were a direct and imminent threat to the United States? Isn't that true?"

"Absolutely." the spokesman replied

This final example, absolutely connects it all together. War with Iraq, direct and imminent threat to the US.

 

[jimnyc]

Man, you must like being wrong!

But there can be no peace if our security depends on the will and whims of a ruthless and aggressive dictator. I'm not willing to stake one American life on trusting Saddam Hussein.

Our demands are directed only at the regime that enslaves them and threatens us.

The attacks of September the 11th showed our country that vast oceans no longer protect us from danger... Today in Iraq, we see a threat whose outlines are far more clearly defined, and whose consequences could be far more deadly. Saddam Hussein's actions have put us on notice, and there is no refuge from our responsibilities.

Perfect response by Bush and dead on accurate.

"No terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to the security of our people and the stability of the world than the regime of Saddam Hussein in Iraq," Rumsfeld testified to lawmakers in September 2002.

That is correct! Saddam was a threat to the entire world. He wanted to acquire nuclear weapons and would have loved to use them on us, our soldiers, or our allies.

On January 26, 2003, CNN television asked White House communications director Dan Bartlett "is he (Saddam) an imminent threat to US interests, either in that part of the world or to Americans right here at home?"

"Well, of course he is," Bartlett replied.

That's a clear and direct statement.... but once again you'll try to squeeze out of that as well....

Yes, an imminent threat to US interests in the ME region. Nothing to squeeze out of, you're simply trying to make more out of the statements than are actually there.

On May 7, 2003, a reporter asked then White House spokesman Ari Fleischer: "We went to war, didn't we, to find these – because we said that these weapons were a direct and imminent threat to the United States? Isn't that true?"

"Absolutely." the spokesman replied

This final example, absolutely connects it all together. War with Iraq, direct and imminent threat to the US.

Ok, so Fleischer is saying in essence that "we said that these weapons were a direct and imminent threat". He obviously misspoke, unless you can show me who actually said what he is referring to.

Give it up already! This is getting ridiculous. Saddam WAS a threat to his people, the entire region, and if left unattended - to the USA as well. The imminent threat was to the entire region that Saddam and his regime had access to. This included our soldiers and our allies.

 

[kcmcdonald]

Jim
get em'