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.
It was wrong because under the previous administration they fragmented our ability for "intelligent" intelligence. ie. FBI-CIA. We then had to rely on outside sources for our intelligence....which all seemed to say that there was a threat that needed to be dealt with....not just from the Bush administration.
IF we accept this premise is true, then Bush had 2 1/2 years to "fix" what was wrong with our intelligence.
Your claim also doesn't address intelligence doctoring which has been firmly established.
2 1/2 years of fixing something as covert as intelligence? It probably takes a decade or more to fix something like that.
I don't buy in the intell doctoring....can you give a nonbias source to what your stating? I ain't saying your wrong, but the only place where I heard it was MSNBC.
I found it myself...thank you.
SIX BOMBS, 95 DEAD - CARNAGE AND DESPAIR RETURN TO IRAQ...Hellish scenes as six bomb blasts rip through Baghdad leaving at least 95 dead and 536 wounded | Mail Online
You got your wish
Does this actually surprise anyone?
Bush Senior saw this same scenario as a reason NOT to invade Iraq when he had the chance. He knew that invading Iraq would unleash secular violence. He knew US troops would be needed to serve as policemen. He knew there was no easy way out of Iraq once we went in. The entire world warned baby Bush that this would be a consequence of invading.
You brag about the surge working, but fail to mention that the surge was intended as a short term action until the Iraqi government could take over. It merely proves what everyone knew beforehand about the political situation in Iraq
Because if we'd gone to Baghdad we would have been all alone. There wouldn't have been anybody else with us. There would have been a U.S. occupation of Iraq. None of the Arab forces that were willing to fight with us in Kuwait were willing to invade Iraq.
Once you got to Iraq and took it over, took down Saddam Hussein's government, then what are you going to put in its place? That's a very volatile part of the world, and if you take down the central government of Iraq, you could very easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off: part of it, the Syrians would like to have to the west, part of it -- eastern Iraq -- the Iranians would like to claim, they fought over it for eight years. In the north you've got the Kurds, and if the Kurds spin loose and join with the Kurds in Turkey, then you threaten the territorial integrity of Turkey.
It's a quagmire if you go that far and try to take over Iraq.
The other thing was casualties. Everyone was impressed with the fact we were able to do our job with as few casualties as we had. But for the 146 Americans killed in action, and for their families -- it wasn't a cheap war. And the question for the president, in terms of whether or not we went on to Baghdad, took additional casualties in an effort to get Saddam Hussein, was how many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth?
Our judgment was, not very many, and I think we got it right.
Dick Cheney at the American Enterprise Institute 4/ 15/ 1994
YouTube - Cheney '94: Invading Baghdad Would Create Quagmire
null
Let me guess. Somehow NOT Bush's fault?It was wrong because under the previous administration they fragmented our ability for "intelligent" intelligence. ie. FBI-CIA.
Somehow your talking about "LIES"....and assuming yes, it's BUSH, BUSH, BUSH.
I have already stated that it was a group effort, and Bush. I am making a point that under Clinton, he fragmented our intell, because he didn't think we needed it in this day and age. Don't you think that it could have clouded the decision...or, is it just a lot easier going with your left wing talking points and blaming Bush, and Bush alone? Do you want to take it to that level??? Maybe we could also bring up Clinton's shortcomings as president.
Cheney argued AGAINT invading:
YouTube - Cheney '94: Invading Baghdad Would Create Quagmire
wonder what changed his mind?
And this is thanks to the Democrats, HOW? Dubya and DICK orchestrated this invasion and occupation.
You got your wish
Let me guess. Somehow NOT Bush's fault?
Somehow your talking about "LIES"....and assuming yes, it's BUSH, BUSH, BUSH.
I have already stated that it was a group effort, and Bush. I am making a point that under Clinton, he fragmented our intell, because he didn't think we needed it in this day and age. Don't you think that it could have clouded the decision...or, is it just a lot easier going with your left wing talking points and blaming Bush, and Bush alone? Do you want to take it to that level??? Maybe we could also bring up Clinton's shortcomings as president.
CON$ervative knee-jerk programming, when in doubt, BLAME CLINTON.
"Iraq does not represent any threat to the United States at this time. Their weapons programs have been exaggerated by the Clinton Administration."
- Tom Delay, 1999
"We are now convinced Saddam has no weapons of mass destruction or active programs."
- President Bill Clinton, August 9th, 2000
This is where you are wrong, and it may be through no fault of your own. I query this based on conversations going on within two separate threads where pro-Iraq invasion folks are saying that the surge helped to defeat terrorism in Iraq, hence the surge was a cataclysmic success. So, my question is if the surge was such a success and the terrorists have been defeated, WHY can't the Iraqi people defend themselves?You query whether the surge worked and the Iraqis are able to defend themselves based on the outcome of this event.
Somehow your talking about "LIES"....and assuming yes, it's BUSH, BUSH, BUSH.
I have already stated that it was a group effort, and Bush. I am making a point that under Clinton, he fragmented our intell, because he didn't think we needed it in this day and age. Don't you think that it could have clouded the decision...or, is it just a lot easier going with your left wing talking points and blaming Bush, and Bush alone? Do you want to take it to that level??? Maybe we could also bring up Clinton's shortcomings as president.
CON$ervative knee-jerk programming, when in doubt, BLAME CLINTON.
"Iraq does not represent any threat to the United States at this time. Their weapons programs have been exaggerated by the Clinton Administration."
- Tom Delay, 1999
"We are now convinced Saddam has no weapons of mass destruction or active programs."
- President Bill Clinton, August 9th, 2000
Only an idiot on the left would make a statement like this. The left blames Bush for everything including a hurricane...yet no one can blame Clinton. Clinton DID say that Iraq would need to be dealt with....including Hillary. This is priceless.
"[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.
- (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998
All of the comments you quote took place before the UN had a chance to go into Iraq and check for WMD's, providing the intel we needed to determine that there were none there.
And, as we know, there were none.
The difference? Bush went in knowing there were no WMDs. These comments were made on general intelligence data.
In addition, as they were made in 1998, 5 years before the invasion, it's quite possible that he DID have WMDs at that point, but had destroyed them by the time of the invasion.
CON$ervative knee-jerk programming, when in doubt, BLAME CLINTON.
"Iraq does not represent any threat to the United States at this time. Their weapons programs have been exaggerated by the Clinton Administration."
- Tom Delay, 1999
"We are now convinced Saddam has no weapons of mass destruction or active programs."
- President Bill Clinton, August 9th, 2000
Only an idiot on the left would make a statement like this. The left blames Bush for everything including a hurricane...yet no one can blame Clinton. Clinton DID say that Iraq would need to be dealt with....including Hillary. This is priceless.
Only brainwashed mindless drones on the Right claim the Left blamed a hurricane on Bush!!!
Bush was blamed for the "good job Brownie" did.
CON$ can't survive without their Straw Men.
Only an idiot on the left would make a statement like this. The left blames Bush for everything including a hurricane...yet no one can blame Clinton. Clinton DID say that Iraq would need to be dealt with....including Hillary. This is priceless.
Only brainwashed mindless drones on the Right claim the Left blamed a hurricane on Bush!!!
Bush was blamed for the "good job Brownie" did.
CON$ can't survive without their Straw Men.
Images of desperation in aftermath of Hurricane Katrina-- Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., blames Katrina on George Bush not advocating Kyoto Treaty; Kyoto Kennedy Kites Katrina.
Images of desperation in aftermath of Hurricane Katrina-- Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., blames Katrina on George Bush not advocating Kyoto Treaty; Kyoto Kennedy Kites Katrina.
Notwithstanding continuing rescue and support efforts, the calamity has triggered a rather opportunistic and cynical reaction by opponents of the current U.S. Administration. In an eerie development that echoes the political exploitation of the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster last December, environmental campaigners, Green journalists and European officials are blaming (once again) the U.S. and its people for the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina. Instead of supporting the rescue efforts, demagogues are using the human tragedy in a futile attempt to score points. At a time of utter desolation and misfortune, propagandists in high office and parts of the media are abandoning America and its victims for purely political goals.
FrontPage Magazine - Hurricane Katrina: A Republican Conspiracy?
Like I said on another thread...your a goofball.
Only brainwashed mindless drones on the Right claim the Left blamed a hurricane on Bush!!!
Bush was blamed for the "good job Brownie" did.
CON$ can't survive without their Straw Men.
Images of desperation in aftermath of Hurricane Katrina-- Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., blames Katrina on George Bush not advocating Kyoto Treaty; Kyoto Kennedy Kites Katrina.
Images of desperation in aftermath of Hurricane Katrina-- Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., blames Katrina on George Bush not advocating Kyoto Treaty; Kyoto Kennedy Kites Katrina.
Notwithstanding continuing rescue and support efforts, the calamity has triggered a rather opportunistic and cynical reaction by opponents of the current U.S. Administration. In an eerie development that echoes the political exploitation of the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster last December, environmental campaigners, Green journalists and European officials are blaming (once again) the U.S. and its people for the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina. Instead of supporting the rescue efforts, demagogues are using the human tragedy in a futile attempt to score points. At a time of utter desolation and misfortune, propagandists in high office and parts of the media are abandoning America and its victims for purely political goals.
FrontPage Magazine - Hurricane Katrina: A Republican Conspiracy?
Like I said on another thread...your a goofball.
You gotta love how the CON$ can take a statement by ONE person and paint EVERYONE the CON$ are programmed to HATE with that same brush.
Now if you honor the Golden Rule and paint all CON$ with a statement of a David Duke or whoever, they have a cow Right on the spot!!!
Images of desperation in aftermath of Hurricane Katrina-- Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., blames Katrina on George Bush not advocating Kyoto Treaty; Kyoto Kennedy Kites Katrina.
Images of desperation in aftermath of Hurricane Katrina-- Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., blames Katrina on George Bush not advocating Kyoto Treaty; Kyoto Kennedy Kites Katrina.
Notwithstanding continuing rescue and support efforts, the calamity has triggered a rather opportunistic and cynical reaction by opponents of the current U.S. Administration. In an eerie development that echoes the political exploitation of the Indian Ocean tsunami disaster last December, environmental campaigners, Green journalists and European officials are blaming (once again) the U.S. and its people for the devastation caused by Hurricane Katrina. Instead of supporting the rescue efforts, demagogues are using the human tragedy in a futile attempt to score points. At a time of utter desolation and misfortune, propagandists in high office and parts of the media are abandoning America and its victims for purely political goals.
FrontPage Magazine - Hurricane Katrina: A Republican Conspiracy?
Like I said on another thread...your a goofball.
You gotta love how the CON$ can take a statement by ONE person and paint EVERYONE the CON$ are programmed to HATE with that same brush.
Now if you honor the Golden Rule and paint all CON$ with a statement of a David Duke or whoever, they have a cow Right on the spot!!!
First, of all only an idiot wouldn't read what I posted, and it's obvious that you didn't. Second I blew you out of the water because you origianlly denied it. Next the second source is not a Robt Kennedy Jr. statement. I don't hate the left as you do the right. I disagree with the left politically, not as you hate the conservatives.
I feel we need both conservatives and liberals to make a check and balance, and hopefully between the two parties we will end up with the best. Right now this isn't happening, and we are not getting the best. You on the other hand only see politics with blinders on anything but "your party"
You are a goofball Edie.
This is the last post from me to you Edie. It's obvious that with your drivel lacks intellect.
Let me re-assure our American friends and colleagues that this pitiless mind-set of environmental activists is not representative for the vast majority of Europeans who are following the heartbreaking events with great concern and empathy.Nobody could have said it better. I hope Germanys environmental minister Jürgen Trittin was listening. He blames George Bush for hurricane Katrina despite the fact that that statistics don't show a particularly increase in the frequency of hurricanes in the U.S. in the last decades.
According to Herr Trittin, President Bush has neglected environmental protection and shut his eyes to the economic and human damage that natural catastrophes like Katrina inflict on his country and the world's economy.
