Did you Support War in Iraq??

[NotfooledbyW]

We covered all of that.

No. The proof we didn’t is you are still dodging the same question.

Is it true or false @Correll that if W did not have “intelligence” that left no doubt that the Iraq regime continued to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised that W said and put it in writing that America was willing to leave SH in power and there would be no war?

You could answer “true” to the above question because “true” is the only truthful answer. But you can’t because the make-believe world you reside in comes crashing down if you ever admitted you actually understand the truth about Iraq.

 

[Correll]

No. The proof we didn’t is you are still dodging the same question.



You could answer “true” to the above question because “true” is the only truthful answer. But you can’t because the make-believe world you reside in comes crashing down if you ever admitted you actually understand the truth about Iraq.

I answered all your questions, over and over again. YOU are the one playing the dishonest game where if you DISAGREE with something you pretend it did not happen, not me.


YOU are the one who is refusing to answer questions.


Why do you WANT to spread hatred and division among and between your fellow citizens?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

A big part of the argument for war, was that a functioning democracy in the ME would be a powerful ideological challenge to Islamic Extremism.

Iraq was presented as a good candidate for that.

You say disarming Iraq was not the sole justification for invading Iraq. You give equal status to the argument that a functioning democracy in the ME would be a powerful ideological challenge to Islamic Extremism. You are saying that W sought authorization from Congress in order to invade Iraq solely to place a functioning democracy in the ME.

So what were UN inspectors doing in Iraq at W’s request so that Iraq could be disarmed peacefully and there would be no war to nation build?

There is no logic or reason that can be applied to your preposterous claim. “A big part of the argument for war, was that a functioning democracy in the ME would be a powerful ideological challenge to Islamic Extremism.”

That was never an argument fir the necessity of starting a war. It was a desirable outcome for warmongers at the time but it never held its own as a justification for war. The only justification was disarming Iraq of WMD to pull the trigger and fire the first shot.

 

[Correll]

You say disarming Iraq was not the sole justification for invading Iraq. You give equal status to the argument that a functioning democracy in the ME would be a powerful ideological challenge to Islamic Extremism. You are saying that W sought authorization from Congress in order to invade Iraq solely to place a functioning democracy in the ME.
.....

YOu lie all the time.

1. Equal status? WTF is that? I never said that. That was you just making up shit and now trying to build...some bullshit on top of that previous shit.


2. I never said Bush did anything "solely" for any reason. I don't talk that way. I understand that people making decisions is a very complex and opaque process. YOU say shit like "solely for this reason" not me.


I was done with your post at that point. We have covered ALL this ground many times over. The vast majority of any further questions you have, will be based almost completely on your silly games, of editing out reasons you disagree with, or making stupid and conflicting assumptions and thus inventing contradictions based on nothing but the voices in your head.


We are done with that.


The question now is, WHY DO YOU WANT TO SPREAD HATE AND DIVISION AMONG YOUR FELLOW AMERICANS?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

2. I never said Bush did anything "solely" for any reason.

That’s exactly the point. W decided to invade Iraq solely based on disarming the regime of WMD. There was no other reason to do it when he decided sometime after March 10 2003 to do it because;

“Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.” DUBYA the DECIDER March 17 2003.

W did not say he just got some new last minute intelligence about SH’s attempt to assassinate his father. W said it was about WMD being hidden from inspectors.

And you say I’m lying when saying the sole justification for war was to disarm Iraq. I’m quoting W himself for Christ’s sake.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I was done with your post at that point. We have covered ALL this ground many times over. The vast majority of any further questions you have, will be based almost completely on your silly games, of editing out reasons you disagree with, or making stupid and conflicting assumptions and thus inventing contradictions based on nothing but the voices in your head.

Your arguments are still mostly about format and accusations about motive. That does nit cover substance.

Its why you refuse to answer this question:

“Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.” DUBYA the DECIDER March 17 2003.

Is it true or false @Correll that if W did not have “intelligence” that left no doubt that the Iraq regime continued to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised that W said and put it in writing that America was willing to leave SH in power and there would be no war?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

1. Equal status? WTF is that? I never said that.

I never said I was quoting you. Its the basis of your false argument that nation building was an additional argument for the necessity of war. The one you liked to justify killing half a million Iraqis. That puts nation building on an equal status with disarming Iraq of WMD as a necessary reason to justify starting a war in a place where a war did not exist at the time.

Its not true. Nation Building was never used as a justification for starting the war in Iraq 2003 - 2011.

 

[Correll]

That’s exactly the point. W decided to invade Iraq solely based on disarming the regime of WMD. .....

People don't make decisions that way. Your claim is absurd.

You are just talking shit now.


Why do you want to spread hate and division among your fellow Americans?

 

[Correll]

Your arguments are still mostly about format and accusations about motive. That does nit cover substance.

Its why you refuse to answer this question:

“Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised.” DUBYA the DECIDER March 17 2003.

We have covered ALL this ground many times over. The vast majority of any further questions you have, will be based almost completely on your silly games, of editing out reasons you disagree with, or making stupid and conflicting assumptions and thus inventing contradictions based on nothing but the voices in your head.

Why do you want to spread hate and division among your fellow Americans?

 

[Correll]

I never said I was quoting you. Its the basis of your false argument that nation building was an additional argument for the necessity of war. The one you liked to justify killing half a million Iraqis. That puts nation building on an equal status ...

None of what you just said is true.

I did not use it to justify "killing a half a million iraqis. It did not "put it on an equal status".


YOu are just making up shit, and then building new shit on top of the made up shit.


Why do you want to spread hate and division among your fellow Americans?

 

[Stann]

Bush jr. Should have listened to his dad and stayed the hell out of Iraq.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Why do you WANT to spread hatred and division among and between your fellow citizens?

Why is that your argument and answer to this question:

Is it true or false @Correll that if W did not have “intelligence” that left no doubt that the Iraq regime continued to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons ever devised that W said and put it in writing that America was willing to leave SH in power and there would be no war?

Why does asking you that question spread hatred and division among and between my fellow citizens? You make no sense . Trump and his MAGA supporters are united with the anti-war left on the matter that W lied us into war and the war was a huge disaster. So you are a flat earther on the truth about Iraq.

There comes a time in society when confronted with people like you who can’t give up their beliefs (the earth is flat) when objective reality no longer supports it ( nation building justified invading Iraq on its own) it becomes necessary to move on. If that’s the division you are complaining about so be it. We can no longer coddle you and your beliefs.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

I did not use it to justify "killing a half a million iraqis. It did not "put it on an equal status".

Are you finally telling me that nothing justified killing the half a million Iraqis that W’s invasion caused.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

It did not "put it on an equal status".

Why did you post this then?

A big part of the argument for war, was that a functioning democracy in the ME would be a powerful ideological challenge to Islamic Extremism. Iraq was presented as a good candidate for that.

Look at your answer to my question in post27097208

Would you have still supported the war based on nation building in the event that United Nations Security Council inspectors had successfully disarmed Iraq being declared in full compliance with all United Nations Security Council resolutions as described in 1441?

2. Yes. I found the WMD argument to be unconvincing at the time. WMDs are World War ONE technology, and I do not believe that we can restrict access to that level of technology. The idea of an rebuttal to the ideological argument of Islamic Fundamentalism was the more convincing argument to me.

That is putting nation building on an equal basis with disarming Iraq for earning your personal support for the invasion of Iraq which caused half a million Iraqi deaths.

 

[Correll]

Why is that your argument and answer to this question:



Why does asking you that question spread hatred and division among and between my fellow citizens? You make no sense . Trump and his MAGA supporters are united with the anti-war left on the matter that W lied us into war and the war was a huge disaster. So you are a flat earther on the truth about Iraq.

There comes a time in society when confronted with people like you who can’t give up their beliefs (the earth is flat) when objective reality no longer supports it ( nation building justified invading Iraq on its own) it becomes necessary to move on. If that’s the division you are complaining about so be it. We can no longer coddle you and your beliefs.

Knock off the shit. We've covered that shit extensively. You are talking in circles just like Wally.

Now, Why do you want to spread hate and division among your fellow Americans?

 

[Correll]

Are you finally telling me that nothing justified killing the half a million Iraqis that W’s invasion caused.

Why do you want to spread hate and division among your fellow Americans?

 

[Correll]

Why did you post this then?




Look at your answer to my question in post27097208




That is putting nation building on an equal basis with disarming Iraq for earning your personal support for the invasion of Iraq which caused half a million Iraqi deaths.

YOu have purposefully conflated and confused, various reasons and goals and legal justifications, with no attempt to keep them straight, or to be honest about them.


Did you do that on purpose to confuse the issue, to hide your ill intent, or was it an honest result of your confused thinking?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Why do you want to spread hate and division among your fellow Americans?

I’m not. Why is this your argument? It is not an argument. It is folly.

YOu have purposefully conflated and confused, various reasons and goals and legal justifications, with no attempt to keep them straight, or to be honest about them.

Again, that is not a reply based on substance and content. It is a format complaint. It may very well be that you are confused by the facts, but that is your problem not mine.

You certainly reveal a lot by the fact that you would rather make excuses than answer critical questions. There is absolutely nothing confusing about the fact that disarming Iraq was and is the only, sole and singular justification that W used to make the decision to invade Iraq.

That is why you were asked this question:

When and in what constitutional or any other legal framework was the GingrichKrauthammer nation building case Presented to the American people and Congress of the United States of America by the Bush Administration to initiate a long term declaration of war against Iraq as a case for self defense against the continuing threat of Saddam Hussein being the dictator of Iraq?

Would you have still supported the war based on nation building in the event that United Nations Security Council inspectors had successfully disarmed Iraq being declared in full compliance with all United Nations Security Council resolutions as described in 1441?

You told the readers on this forum that you support solely the GingrichKrauthammer nation building case for invading Iraq.

You did not support the war because of the actual case for war that the President of the United States made.

I cannot prove it but I suspect you are lying when you say you rejected the WMD argument and accepted the nation building argument prior to the invasion.

I suspect that you were on board with the WMD scare tactics and lies during the ramp up to the invasion but when it turned out there were no WMDs you conveniently settled upon the Gingrich Krauthammer argument for nation building to cover the stench of your ignorance and being duped.

You have proven yourself to be the slimy worm that would lie about such things.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Why do you never hold Saddam responsible for his choices?

You are a liar. The entire world was holding Saddam Hussain responsible when it unanimously passed UN security council resolution 1441. We, including America were holding him responsible using peaceful means and it was working. America drafted the fucking resolution. All it would’ve taken was a few more months of inspections.

Apparently the war mongering blood-thirsty type of American in you got the better of you and you preferred that the Iraqi people be put in harms way so you could tell the UN to go fuck itself. As a result half a million of them are dead.

 

[Correll]

I’m not. Why is this your argument? It is not an argument. It is folly.



Again, that is not a reply based on substance and content. It is a format complaint. It may very well be that you are confused by the facts, but that is your problem not mine.

You certainly reveal a lot by the fact that you would rather make excuses than answer critical questions. There is absolutely nothing confusing about the fact that disarming Iraq was and is the only, sole and singular justification that W used to make the decision to invade Iraq.

That is why you were asked this question:



You told the readers on this forum that you support solely the GingrichKrauthammer nation building case for invading Iraq.

You did not support the war because of the actual case for war that the President of the United States made.

I cannot prove it but I suspect you are lying when you say you rejected the WMD argument and accepted the nation building argument prior to the invasion.

I suspect that you were on board with the WMD scare tactics and lies during the ramp up to the invasion but when it turned out there were no WMDs you conveniently settled upon the Gingrich Krauthammer argument for nation building to cover the stench of your ignorance and being duped.

You have proven yourself to be the slimy worm that would lie about such things.

lol!!! No, it is you that is the liar here. YOu know it. I know it. This thread is pretty much dead except for us, so I don't know why you are lying about that.


We've been going in circles since MAY. Time to wrap it up.


You are obviously just using this to spread hate and division. I want to know why.


Do you hate America that much?