Who KILLED 4,000 US troops & Most of the 87,000 Iraqis?

[Dragon]

Then WHAT THE HELL GOOD was the 1991 CEASE FIRE?

It ended the Persian Gulf War, of course.

 

[skookerasbil]

Bush?
Did Bush plant IEDs?
Did Bush plant bombs on the children so when US soldiers handing candy the kids and soldiers were blow apart? Was that Bush's fault?

Did Bush plant the bombs in the Mosques.. the schools?

I've got a question for you. The terrorists who did all of that killing - were they there BEFORE we invaded Iraq? Saddam was a bastard; but he did not have AQ running rampant inside his country blowing his citizens to pieces. That only occurred AFTER we invaded and destabilized the the region. So, no, Bush didn't plant the IEDs, but his unnecessary war was the reason that AQ was there blowing up US troops and Iraqi civilians. Sorry, that's just how it works. Unless you want to tell me that Obama is not responsible for any bad that happens on HIS watch?..... Didn't think so.

This is a POLITICS forum s0n!!!

 

[healthmyths]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone in this thread other than the original poster believe his claim (from the cartoon he posted) that Obama, Kerry, Murtha, and Reid recruited terrorists terrorists to kill 3,000 US troops

AS sure as the sun come up in the east,just as Bush's statement was dumb as it gets.

Harry Ried i, We have lost the war what do you think the enemy will do when he thinks he has us on the ropes?? WE all saw the results.

Giving other dumb ass's a pass just to fluff another dumb ass's statement isn't so bright.

Then maybe you should tell these "DUMB ASSES!"!
A Harvard study found here THE "EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT" asked:
"Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?

The short answer is YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.

STUDY ABSTRACT
Are insurgents affected by information on US casualty sensitivity?
Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news
across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by
comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower
access to information about U.S news after public statements critical
of the war.
We find in periods after a spike in war-critical statements, insurgent
attacks increases by 5-10 percent.
The results suggest that insurgent groups respond rationally to
expected probability of US withdrawal.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "War is lost",
This is a well known LIE! IRAQ IS NOT LOST!

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D) "Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
The 9 soldiers were ALL acquited!
his preemptory claim that Marines in the town of Haditha, Iraq had killed women and children ''in cold blood'' in a
November 2005 incident. Of the eight Marines accused, only one still faces possible charges --
the rest were either acquitted or had the charges dropped.
NY Times Plays Up John Murtha's Anti-War Turn in Obit, Omits Smear of Marines as Killers | NewsBusters.org
Senator Kerry "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in th dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."


NOW DUMB ASS...
YOU tell me that if you are on the playing field and YOUR HOME team CHEERS when you are tackled. Boos when you make a great run and
picks up the visiting team cheering them... WHAT affect would that have on you? What affect would it have on the visiting team?

HOW F...ing complicated is it ?
Are you that simple naive to think that when Congressional leaders CALL their own military and troops Killers, civilian killers... terrorists" are you that totally NAIVE NOT to think that has a NEGATIVE AFFECT on OUR troops and a very "enoboldenment" on recruiting? ON TERRORISTS?

MY God... are you and your fellow head in the sand IDIOTS!!!

YOU and the CHEERLEADERS for terrorists DID NOT WIN but you certainly helped make 3,000+ US troop families losers! BET YOU are REAL produc of helping TERRORISTS KILL US TROOPS!

YOU and your ilk have to be class A idiots NOT to understand the simple concept... YOU DON"T CHEER FOR someone who's trying to KILL your fellow AMericans... IT IS THAT SIMPLE!!!
BUT evidently TOO complicated for you and your ilk!!
SAD and I hope you can sleep at night realizing some families are missing loved ones that were KILLED BECAUSE YOU CHEERED on the enemy!

 

[Shuban]

I want to ask a very simple question about 1911 is that have we found "weapons of mass destruction" in Iraq?

 

[Dragon]

Then maybe you should tell these "DUMB ASSES!"!
A Harvard study found here THE "EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT" asked:
"Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?

The short answer is YES!!!

A better answer is that if we hadn't mounted our invasion in the first place, the question wouldn't even arise.

 

[skookerasbil]

Just out of curiosity, does anyone in this thread other than the original poster believe his claim (from the cartoon he posted) that Obama, Kerry, Murtha, and Reid recruited terrorists terrorists to kill 3,000 US troops

AS sure as the sun come up in the east,just as Bush's statement was dumb as it gets.

Harry Ried i, We have lost the war what do you think the enemy will do when he thinks he has us on the ropes?? WE all saw the results.

Giving other dumb ass's a pass just to fluff another dumb ass's statement isn't so bright.

Then maybe you should tell these "DUMB ASSES!"!
A Harvard study found here THE "EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT" asked:
"Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?

The short answer is YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.

STUDY ABSTRACT
Are insurgents affected by information on US casualty sensitivity?
Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news
across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by
comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower
access to information about U.S news after public statements critical
of the war.
We find in periods after a spike in war-critical statements, insurgent
attacks increases by 5-10 percent.
The results suggest that insurgent groups respond rationally to
expected probability of US withdrawal.

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "War is lost",
This is a well known LIE! IRAQ IS NOT LOST!

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D) "Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
The 9 soldiers were ALL acquited!
his preemptory claim that Marines in the town of Haditha, Iraq had killed women and children ''in cold blood'' in a
November 2005 incident. Of the eight Marines accused, only one still faces possible charges --
the rest were either acquitted or had the charges dropped.
NY Times Plays Up John Murtha's Anti-War Turn in Obit, Omits Smear of Marines as Killers | NewsBusters.org
Senator Kerry "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in th dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."


NOW DUMB ASS...
YOU tell me that if you are on the playing field and YOUR HOME team CHEERS when you are tackled. Boos when you make a great run and
picks up the visiting team cheering them... WHAT affect would that have on you? What affect would it have on the visiting team?

HOW F...ing complicated is it ?
Are you that simple naive to think that when Congressional leaders CALL their own military and troops Killers, civilian killers... terrorists" are you that totally NAIVE NOT to think that has a NEGATIVE AFFECT on OUR troops and a very "enoboldenment" on recruiting? ON TERRORISTS?

MY God... are you and your fellow head in the sand IDIOTS!!!

YOU and the CHEERLEADERS for terrorists DID NOT WIN but you certainly helped make 3,000+ US troop families losers! BET YOU are REAL produc of helping TERRORISTS KILL US TROOPS!

YOU and your ilk have to be class A idiots NOT to understand the simple concept... YOU DON"T CHEER FOR someone who's trying to KILL your fellow AMericans... IT IS THAT SIMPLE!!!
BUT evidently TOO complicated for you and your ilk!!
SAD and I hope you can sleep at night realizing some families are missing loved ones that were KILLED BECAUSE YOU CHEERED on the enemy!

 

[J.E.D]

k00ks like josefK told us that 5 million Iraquis were killed by US forces..............

just wanted to point out that little tidbit..........

How about you back up that little tidbit (or what I call BULLSHIT) with some proof. I'll wait

 

[J.E.D]

This is a POLITICS forum s0n!!!

Yes, it sure is. And your point is? BTW, I didn't bring up Bush, your buddy did. Are you drunk?

 

[healthmyths]

The primary blame lies with Bush, yes. Without Bush's manipulation we would never have gone to war in Iraq.

However, secondary blame must fall on every member of Congress who voted for the declaration of war.

WHAT Manipulation???
Clinton signed The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 Public law 105-338 CNN - Clinton: Iraq has abused its last chance - December 16, 1998
The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 Public law 105-338 expressed the sense of congress it should be policy to support efforts to remove from power the current Iraqi regime.
"The President has authority under the consitution to take action in order to deter and prevent acts of international terrorism against the United States."

President Clinton addressed the nation from the Oval Office
Clinton spells out Iraq's non-compliance
# Iraq repeatedly blocked UNSCOM from inspecting suspect sites.
# Iraq repeatedly restricted UNSCOM's ability to obtain necessary evidence.
# Iraq tried to stop an UNSCOM biological weapons team from videotaping a site and photocopying documents and prevented Iraqi personnel from answering UNSCOM's questions.
# Iraq has failed to turn over virtually all documents requested by the inspectors.
US Forces:
There are 15 U.S. warships and 97 U.S. aircraft in the Persian Gulf region, including about 70 aboard the aircraft carrier USS Enterprise. More than 12,000 sailors and Marines are in the region.

U.S. sources said eight of the warships, equipped with cruise missiles, have been moved into the northern part of the Gulf, within easy striking distance of Baghdad. More troops and jets have been ordered to the region.

More than 300 cruise missiles are available for use against Iraq, and there are air-launched cruise missiles aboard 14 B-52 bombers on the British island of Diego Garcia, sources said.

Britain has 22 strike aircraft in the region.

Clinton statement from the Oval Office on attack against Iraq

December 16, 1998
Web posted at: 8:51 p.m. EST (0151 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- From the Oval Office, President Clinton told the nation Wednesday evening why he ordered new military strikes against Iraq.
The president said Iraq's refusal to cooperate with U.N. weapons inspectors presented a threat to the entire world.
"Saddam (Hussein) must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas or biological weapons," Clinton said.
Operation Desert Fox, a strong, sustained series of attacks, will be carried out over several days by U.S. and British forces, Clinton said.
"Earlier today I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces," Clinton said.

"Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors," said Clinton.

Clinton also stated that, while other countries also had weapons of mass destruction, Hussein is in a different category because he has used such weapons against his own people and against his neighbors.

'Without delay, diplomacy or warning'

The Iraqi leader was given a final warning six weeks ago, Clinton said, when Baghdad promised to cooperate with U.N. inspectors at the last minute just as U.S. warplanes were headed its way.

"Along with Prime Minister (Tony) Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning," Clinton said.

The president said the report handed in Tuesday by Richard Butler, head of the United Nations Special Commission in charge of finding and destroying Iraqi weapons, was stark and sobering.

Iraq failed to cooperate with the inspectors and placed new restrictions on them, Clinton said. He said Iraqi officials also destroyed records and moved everything, even the furniture, out of suspected sites before inspectors were allowed in.

"Instead of inspectors disarming Saddam, Saddam has disarmed the inspectors," Clinton said.

"In halting our airstrikes in November, I gave Saddam a chance -- not a license. If we turn our backs on his defiance, the credibility of U.S. power as a check against Saddam will be destroyed," the president explained.

Strikes necessary to stunt weapons programs

Clinton said he made the decision to strike Wednesday with the unanimous agreement of his security advisors.

Timing was important, said the president, because without a strong inspection system in place, Iraq could rebuild its chemical, biological and nuclear programs in a matter of months, not years.

"If Saddam can cripple the weapons inspections system and get away with it, he would conclude the international community, led by the United States, has simply lost its will," said Clinton. "He would surmise that he has free rein to rebuild his arsenal of destruction."

Clinton also called Hussein a threat to his people and to the security of the world.

"The best way to end that threat once and for all is with a new Iraqi government -- a government ready to live in peace with its neighbors, a government that respects the rights of its people," Clinton said.

Such a change in Baghdad would take time and effort, Clinton said, adding that his administration would work with Iraqi opposition forces.

Clinton also addressed the ongoing impeachment crisis in the White House.

"Saddam Hussein and the other enemies of peace may have thought that the serious debate currently before the House of Representatives would distract Americans or weaken our resolve to face him down," he said.

"But once more, the United States has proven that although we are never eager to use force, when we must act in America's vital interests, we will do so."


SO TeLL me again... WHY IS BUSH The ONLY ONE to Blame here then???
Clinton pushed the buttons...BUSH executed!

 

[skookerasbil]

k00ks like josefK told us that 5 million Iraquis were killed by US forces..............

just wanted to point out that little tidbit..........

How about you back up that little tidbit (or what I call BULLSHIT) with some proof. I'll wait

Hey s0n........all you k00ks have spent years throwing around number of Iraqi's killed by George Bush.........1 million..............3 million. What?

s0n........its 2011. The whole world has moved past this shit except the internet k00ks with BDS!!!

 

[J.E.D]

k00ks like josefK told us that 5 million Iraquis were killed by US forces..............

just wanted to point out that little tidbit..........

How about you back up that little tidbit (or what I call BULLSHIT) with some proof. I'll wait

Hey s0n........all you k00ks have spent years throwing around number of Iraqi's killed by George Bush.........1 million..............3 million. What?

s0n........its 2011. The whole world has moved past this shit except the internet k00ks with BDS!!!

Did you find that post of mine where I claimed 3 million or 10 million Iraqis were killed? Didn't think so. And does it matter how many were killed? ONE is too many for an unjust war.

Go have another drink, SON, then maybe you'll make sense to .... your drunk buddies? The stick up your ass? Just do yourself a favor before you have that 10th drink - take off your drool cup first. Drool and alcohol don't mix. Just a word to the wise - or, UNwise in your case.

 

[Dragon]

WHAT Manipulation??? . . .
SO TeLL me again... WHY IS BUSH The ONLY ONE to Blame here then???

I already said he's not. Congress voted the declaration of war, and everyone who voted for it is also to blame.

Of course, regarding Clinton, don't be absurd. Going to war is not like an economic collapse. That, you can sometimes blame on a president's predecessor, the way the Great Depression should be blamed on Coolidge more than Hoover, or the Second Depression on Bush more than Obama. But if we go to war, that's the fault either of the president who makes the decision, or of the enemy, depending on who started it.

Thus, World War II -- blame the Japanese. Korea -- blame Truman. Vietnam -- blame Johnson. Persian Gulf -- blame Saddam (he invaded Kuwait, an act of blatant aggression).

Afghanistan and Iraq -- blame Bush.

Now, at the same time, we have to say that a war becomes the succeeding president's responsibility at the time he assumes office, if it's still going on. Thus:

Credit for ending the Korean War promptly goes to President Eisenhower.

Blame for extending the Vietnam War far longer than he should have goes to President Nixon, along with credit for the fact that he finally did end it.

A degree of blame for extending the Iraq war a bit longer than he should have goes to President Obama, and serious blame for the fact we're still in Afghanistan goes to Obama as well, along with credit that the Iraq War is finally over.

In short, there's enough blame to go around. But the primary blame for the war does fall on Bush.

 

[healthmyths]

BUT NONE of you evidently are OLD enough to remember what happened after 9/11!
NONE of you remember the Anthrax attacks!

NONE of YOU remember how YOU wanted Iraq to be blamed!
"Do you think the U.S. made the right decision or the wrong decision in using military force in Iraq?"
4/10-16/03 74% Right decision 19% wrong Decision 7% unsure

SO WHAT HAPPENED between 04/2003 & 1/2007.. when 42% right 50% wrong?

FU...king NEWS MEDIA and DEMOCRATS decided to KILL American soldiers for political GAIN... that's what happened...
IDIOT CHEERLEADERS making statements ..Terrorists troops..civilian killers..AbuGrib!!
something less the 1/10th of 1% of ALL US troops did WAS BLOWN so out of proportion by the MSM and Democrats!
YET we have Durbin saying:"must have been done by Nazis, Soviets --action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

GEEZ you don't think the TERRORIST LOVED to hear that and WHY would idiots encourage Terrorists by saying this KNOWING it was NOT the RULE but the very rare exception!

 

[Dragon]

BUT NONE of you evidently are OLD enough to remember what happened after 9/11!

Of course I am. But I also know that the Iraq War had nothing at all to do with 9/11.

 

[Cowman]

People who wanted an unrealistic level of safety... by blowing shit up in other countries expecting it to stop terrorism or somehow 'prevent' it from coming here.

People who are more afraid of dying in a terrorist attack on American soil than they are of being struck down by lightning.

 

[healthmyths]

WHAT Manipulation??? . . .
SO TeLL me again... WHY IS BUSH The ONLY ONE to Blame here then???

I already said he's not. Congress voted the declaration of war, and everyone who voted for it is also to blame.

Of course, regarding Clinton, don't be absurd. Going to war is not like an economic collapse. That, you can sometimes blame on a president's predecessor, the way the Great Depression should be blamed on Coolidge more than Hoover, or the Second Depression on Bush more than Obama. But if we go to war, that's the fault either of the president who makes the decision, or of the enemy, depending on who started it.

Thus, World War II -- blame the Japanese. Korea -- blame Truman. Vietnam -- blame Johnson. Persian Gulf -- blame Saddam (he invaded Kuwait, an act of blatant aggression).

Afghanistan and Iraq -- blame Bush.

Now, at the same time, we have to say that a war becomes the succeeding president's responsibility at the time he assumes office, if it's still going on. Thus:

Credit for ending the Korean War promptly goes to President Eisenhower.

Blame for extending the Vietnam War far longer than he should have goes to President Nixon, along with credit for the fact that he finally did end it.

A degree of blame for extending the Iraq war a bit longer than he should have goes to President Obama, and serious blame for the fact we're still in Afghanistan goes to Obama as well, along with credit that the Iraq War is finally over.

In short, there's enough blame to go around. But the primary blame for the war does fall on Bush.

NO the problem is just as Vietnam where the USA was abiding by our SEATO treaty to protect an invaded nation and AT THE TIME you and others too young to understand the "cold war" affect.. FEAR the Chinese Communist would domino affect Asia... Look up that term as I lived through that period of the fear of the falling dominos in Asia!

And the problem with Iraq was just like Vietnam and again YOU evidently are either too young or not knowledgeable enough about the power and influence of the totally biased MSM!

Now you obviously get All your information from this biased source!
You are biased about Vietnam and Iraq BECAUSE you watched nightly news!

And evidently unlike YOU I was in journalism school in the 60s when my fellow classmates AND I were part of Students for Democratic Society/Weathermen.. read Ginsberg.. e.e. cummings and wanted to GET the MAN!!!
These same students became well here..let one of them explain it...!

==
"There is a liberal bias. It's demonstrable. You look at some statistics. About 85 percent of the reporters who cover the White House vote Democratic, they have for a long time.
There is a, particularly at the networks, at the lower levels, among the editors and the so-called infrastructure, there is a liberal bias.-
Newsweek Washington Bureau Chief Evan Thomas

Thomas' assertion of 85% reporters vote Democratic is further backed up by:
"MSNBC.com identified 144 journalists who made political contributions from 2004 through the start of the 2008 campaign, according to the public records of the Federal Election Commission. Most of the newsroom checkbooks leaned to the left: 125 journalists gave to Democrats and liberal causes.
Only 17 gave to Republicans. Two gave to both parties."
Journalists give campaign cash - politics - msnbc.com

NOW you and millions FORMED your opinions based on the BIASED content of people I use to be classmates with in the 60s!!!
These people NEVER changed their agenda!
Stick it to the government. Vote 85% of them Democrat and guess who wrote the TV copy for the evening news during Iraq????
So YOU unbeknownst to YOU have been totally manipulated to accept it is OK to call your fellow americans "Terrorists"... to call the Iraq war Wrong.. because after all you got all your content from the evening news!

Did you ever ask yourself WHY did all the major networks FEEDs have the same video? I mean shot for shot exactly the same on all 3 networks!
YET when you took those events in Iraq and realized again..
Blown way out of proportion.. in 2003..2004 THEN with the network news feeding public opinion "War is Lost"... US Troops air-raiding villages...
ALL those EXCEPTIONAL n NOT the rule.. events blown way out of proportion..
Well WHY wouldn't the Terrorists continue after all idiots like YOU blame Bush for "invading" their country... REMEMBER who did most of the IEDS??
Baath party members that were pushed out when Saddam kicked out!

So of course though you and the IDIOT cheerleaders NEVER knew that because the content didn't explain and of course these thugs/barbarians didn't care you were helping them for your reasons i.e. political power int he USA.. damn US troops are killed!

I for one have NOT been manipulated by the totally as Thomas said liberal biased media and hence MY information has always been based on that dictum.. if the MSM reports it.. it is BIASED!

 

[geauxtohell]

BUT NONE of you evidently are OLD enough to remember what happened after 9/11!
NONE of you remember the Anthrax attacks!

NONE of YOU remember how YOU wanted Iraq to be blamed!
"Do you think the U.S. made the right decision or the wrong decision in using military force in Iraq?"
4/10-16/03 74% Right decision 19% wrong Decision 7% unsure

SO WHAT HAPPENED between 04/2003 & 1/2007.. when 42% right 50% wrong?

FU...king NEWS MEDIA and DEMOCRATS decided to KILL American soldiers for political GAIN... that's what happened...
IDIOT CHEERLEADERS making statements ..Terrorists troops..civilian killers..AbuGrib!!
something less the 1/10th of 1% of ALL US troops did WAS BLOWN so out of proportion by the MSM and Democrats!
YET we have Durbin saying:"must have been done by Nazis, Soviets --action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

GEEZ you don't think the TERRORIST LOVED to hear that and WHY would idiots encourage Terrorists by saying this KNOWING it was NOT the RULE but the very rare exception!

I was at Ft. Benning on a live fire range when 9/11 happened.

We found out who was responsible for the Anthrax attack and it wasn't a disgruntled American scientist?

That's great news!

 

[healthmyths]

Again.. proof... A Harvard study found here THE "EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT" asked:

"Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling
for troop withdrawals from Iraq?

The short answer is YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy
research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.

STUDY ABSTRACT
Are insurgents affected by information on US casualty sensitivity? Using data on attacks and variation in access
to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by comparing the rate
of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public
statements critical of the war.
We find in periods after a spike in war-critical statements, insurgent attacks increases by 5-10 percent.
The results suggest that insurgent groups respond rationally to expected probability of US withdrawal.

 

[healthmyths]

BUT NONE of you evidently are OLD enough to remember what happened after 9/11!
NONE of you remember the Anthrax attacks!

NONE of YOU remember how YOU wanted Iraq to be blamed!
"Do you think the U.S. made the right decision or the wrong decision in using military force in Iraq?"
4/10-16/03 74% Right decision 19% wrong Decision 7% unsure

SO WHAT HAPPENED between 04/2003 & 1/2007.. when 42% right 50% wrong?

FU...king NEWS MEDIA and DEMOCRATS decided to KILL American soldiers for political GAIN... that's what happened...
IDIOT CHEERLEADERS making statements ..Terrorists troops..civilian killers..AbuGrib!!
something less the 1/10th of 1% of ALL US troops did WAS BLOWN so out of proportion by the MSM and Democrats!
YET we have Durbin saying:"must have been done by Nazis, Soviets --action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners."

GEEZ you don't think the TERRORIST LOVED to hear that and WHY would idiots encourage Terrorists by saying this KNOWING it was NOT the RULE but the very rare exception!

I was at Ft. Benning on a live fire range when 9/11 happened.

We found out who was responsible for the Anthrax attack and it wasn't a disgruntled American scientist?

That's great news!

But no one knew at the time about Anthrax! It was just accepted it was another "terrorist" attack after all 9/11 shut down airports for 3 days.. shut down Wall street 10 days.. and you don't think 70% of us wanted to do something again... remember.. HINDSIGHT is 20/20!
YES there were NO WMDs.. Bush admitted that.. BUT all the evidence even from these people indicated Saddam was ready and we WEREN'T


32 Democrat quotes ...
BEFORE BUSH ... When CLINTON was President...
"..deny Iraq the capacity to develop WMD".Bill Clinton,1998
"..most brutal dictators of Century", Biden,1998
"Iraq compliance with Resolution 687 becomes shell game"..Daschle 1998
"He will use those WMDs again,as he has ten times since 1983" ..Berger- Clinton National. Security. Advisor 1998
"posed by Iraq's refusal to end its WMD programs" Levin 1998
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999

"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Saddam has ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Iraq's search for WMDs ...will continue as long as Saddam's in power"..Gore 2002
"Saddam retains stockpiles of WMDS.."Byrd 2002
"give President authority to use force..to disarm Saddam because an arsenal of WMDs.threat our security".Kerry 2002
"..Unmistakable evidence Saddam developing nuclear weapons next 5 years.."Rockefeller 2002
"Violated over 11 years every UN resolution demanding disarming WMDs.."Waxman 2002
"He's given aid,comfort & sanctuary to al Qaeda members..and keep developing WMDs"..Hillary 2002
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 2002


So again wouldn't it be great to have the hindsight we have about Obama now then voting for him only because he was black!
Voting for him after he called our troops killers!

Really that was another reason I couldn't vote for him because he was simply running for the office damn who was killed!

 

[rightwinger]

Bush?
Did Bush plant IEDs?
Did Bush plant bombs on the children so when US soldiers handing candy the kids and soldiers were blow apart? Was that Bush's fault?

Did Bush plant the bombs in the Mosques.. the schools?

Did Bush make these statements that CHEERED the deaths of US troops, that cheered the terrorists? Did BUSH encourage the Terrorists to bomb children, US troops like these "so called" Americans did????

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets --action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "War is lost",
U.S. Rep. Murtha(D) "Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
Senator Kerry(D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the
dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Senator Obama(D) .."troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

NO Bush didn't... BUT studies show that statements made by the Cheerleaders DID increase the bombings, the violence AND did make the Liberation of Iraq cost:
3,000 more then necessary American LIVES!
80,000+ more then necessary Iraqi lives!
$600 billion more then necessary!
6 YEARS longer!

All because CHEERLEADERS like the above and a few of YOU were HAPPY that US Troops and Iraqis were KILLED!
I really am saddened by how much blood you have on all your hands!

OK.......let's talk numbers

Bush diverted the war on terror for an iladvised invasion of Iraq. He ignored the advice of his commanders on the number of troops needed on the ground to maintain the peace. Instead he listed to Paul Wolfowitz and the "They will treat us as liberators" crowd

His colossal blunder led to not only a senseless invasion but an occupation with insufficient troops to neutralize the warring factions

The Bush blunder led to almost 4500 American deaths and allowed Taliban forces to reoccupy Afghanistan