Did you Support War in Iraq??

[surada]

I opposed the war.

I opposed it because I understand the primitive nature of Islamic Arab culture enough to realize there are only two possible forms of governence for these severely inbred people. THey either live under a ruthless, strong armed leader who is capable of keeping a lid on the crazies or be ruled by the crazies.

So, essentially, the difference between that culture and America is that the duopoly takes the place just one "leader".

Are you actually suffering from such delusions that you think it is common for us to marry our cousins?

That's rare these days.

Consanguinity Among the Arab and Jewish Populations in ...

Consanguinity among the Arab and Jewish populations in Israel - PubMed

Consanguineous marriages are associated with many problems, although the prevailing opinion is that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. This explains why the custom is still extremely prevalent, particularly in Arab countries, India and small isolated communities. Among Israeli Arabs...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Consanguinity Among the Arab and Jewish Populations in Israel Consanguineous marriages are associated with many problems, although the prevailing opinion is that the advantages outweigh the disadvantages. This explains why the custom is still extremely prevalent, particularly in Arab countries, India and small isolated communities.

More of your Taqiyya. I can't even recall a single posting from you that wasn't a lie.

Cousin marriage in the Middle East - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I toured Saudis facilities for children with neurologcal disorders in 2000. Some of the staff were Swiss and some of the doctors were Sudanese or French or Dutch.. They were state of the art facilities with ongoing education of caregiver mothers for children who were only in the day programs.

We had a lot of discussions about cousin marriages and the changes in courtship etc.. They had become aware of it as their healthcare improved and more infants survived.

So let's hear about your expertise.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Why did he have to reinvade when we were already there providing support?

We did not reinvade - we were invited back in by the sovereign government of Iraq as it should be UNDER a Obama the war against ISIS was limited to air strikes and advisers not in a combat role as they were under Bush - The Iraqis, Kurds and Iranian militias did all the door to door fighting in the cities.

Its the way it should be - minimal casualties for our trooos. There people who live there have to do the hard fighting.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

The Iraqi side has tried on occasion to attach conditions, as it did regarding helicopters and U-2 planes. Iraq has not, however, so far persisted in these or other conditions for the exercise of any of our inspection rights. If it did, we would report it.

Why did you post Blix-Jan27 reporting on January 27 2003 that Iraq was complying when you are trying to make the argument that Blix was not complying?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

It is obvious that, while the numerous initiatives, which are now taken by the Iraqi side with a view to resolving some long-standing open disarmament issues, can be seen as "active", or even "proactive", these initiatives 3–4 months into the new resolution cannot be said to constitute "immediate" cooperation. Nor do they necessarily cover all areas of relevance.

You cited Blix-Mar7 (above) defining Iraq’s proactive cooperation on March 7 2003.

But you did not cite the following key Two points.

The next paragraph reads:

Blix welcomes accelerated cooperation by Iraq, but says unresolved issues remain​

​

"They are nevertheless welcome and UNMOVIC is responding to them in the hope of solving presently unresolved disarmament issues," he stressed, adding that with a proactive Iraqi stance it would take "not years, nor weeks, but months" to resolve the key remaining disarmament tasks, which he said he would present to the Council before the end of this month.​

That was no declaration of Material Breach, but this may be what caused Bush to decide that he had to do this, he had to attack Iraq within 10 days.. Or before the month of March was over.

Mr. Blix emphasized that no evidence had so far been found of weapons of mass destruction being moved around by truck, of mobile production units for biological weapons or of underground facilities for chemical or biological production or storage, as claimed by intelligence authorities. Blix-Mar7​

Blix welcomes accelerated cooperation by Iraq, but says unresolved issues remain​

No evidence had so far been found of weapons of mass destruction .. as claimed by intelligence authorities.

Cheney probably ripped Lil-Dubya a new asshole for getting UN inspectors in.

Do you know what I mean?

 

[Quasar44]

No
Iraq was already trapped by a no fly zone
The bastard Bush is to blame

 

[NotfooledbyW]

No
Iraq was already trapped by a no fly zone
The bastard Bush is to blame

and then voted and supporter the war

Biden voted because Bush said he would go though the UNSC. so Biden did not support the war because Bush did not go through the UNSC like he should have.

 

[struth]

No
Iraq was already trapped by a no fly zone
The bastard Bush is to blame

and then voted and supporter the war

Biden voted because Bush said he would go though the UNSC. so Biden did not support the war because Bush did not go through the UNSC like he should have.

the facts and reality show you are a liar

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Xiden was talking about invading Iraq and removing Saddam...years before the Powell's speech...years before Bush was even in office...

Yes Biden was when Saddam Hussein was not coooerating with UN inspectors. Bush actually did invade Iraq when Biden told him not to because was cooperating with UN inspectors. You’ve got nothing on Biden. Bush is your warmonger.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

the facts and reality show you are a liar

Are you saying Bush did not actually go to the UNSC and obtain 1441 in an unanimous vote?

 

[NotfooledbyW]

the facts and reality show

If you were truly interested in facts and reality you would be able to transport your mind back to the one year anniversary of the Al Qaeda attacks that politically embarrassed the Bush Administration for allowing it to happen on its watch. Cheney’s “country club” manhood was severely and mostly challenged by the terrorists attack - he had to get it back some way - SADDAM HUSSEIN was it.

Politically it dawned on the BYSH Administration to pin the blame on the best symbol of evil , a global state actor and enemy with an army in the Muslim World - None other than SADDAM Hussein.

The AYATOLLAHS in Iran could not be connected to Sunni sponsors of terrorism.

Bush had a Democratic ally in Congress in the pursuit of the new doctrine of “anticipatory self-defense” Iraq - after all Osama Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia and we could not invade our ‘friends’ who created the anti western civilization monster that Bin Laden became.

That Democrat ally
was not Joe Biden —far from it - it was another DICK - Dick Gephardt.

If you were not consciously participating in the post-9/11/01 world hopefully this will bring you back to the facts and reality of the time.

What Joe Biden's Iraq war vote says about his style of politics​

In the summer of 2002, less than a year after the horrific 9/11 attacks, the Bush-Cheney administration initiated a PR campaign to win support for the idea of attacking the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. In a speech at the national conference of Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vice President Dick Cheney proclaimed, “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.” Actually, that was a lie.​

I’ll explain more to you as your reply will be that you posted what Joe Biden said in 1998.

 

[surada]

the facts and reality show

If you were truly interested in facts and reality you would be able to transport your mind back to the one year anniversary of the Al Qaeda attacks that politucakkt embarrassed Bush Administration allowed to happen on its watch.

Politically it dawned on that Administration to pin the blame on the best symbol of evil , a national actor, in the Muslim World - None other than SADDAM Hussein.

The AYATOLLAHS in Iran could not be connected to Sunni sponsors of terrorism.

Bush had a Democratic ally in Congress in the pursuit of the new doctrine of “anticipatory self-defense.” Against Iraq - after all Osama Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia and we could not invade our ‘friends’ who created the anti western civilization monster that Bin Laden became.

That Democrat ally was not Joe Biden —far from it - it was another DICK - Dick Gephardt.

If you were not consciously participating in the post-9/11/01 world hopefully this will bring you back to the facts and reality of the time.

What Joe Biden's Iraq war vote says about his style of politics​

In the summer of 2002, less than a year after the horrific 9/11 attacks, the Bush-Cheney administration initiated a PR campaign to win support for the idea of attacking the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. In a speech at the national conference of Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vice President Dick Cheney proclaimed, “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.” Actually, that was a lie.​

The Saudis revoked OBL's citizenship in 1996 and declared AQ a terrorist organization.

 

[struth]

the facts and reality show you are a liar

Are you saying Bush did not actually go to the UNSC and obtain 1441 in an unanimous vote?

No I am saying you are a liar, troll, and defender of hypocrisy and torturers

 

[struth]

the facts and reality show

If you were truly interested in facts and reality you would be able to transport your mind back to the one year anniversary of the Al Qaeda attacks that politically embarrassed the Bush Administration that allowed to happen on its watch. Cheney’s “country club manhood was severely and mostly challenged by the terrorists attack - he had to get it back some way - SADDAM HUSSEIN was it.

Politically it dawned on that Administration to pin the blame on the best symbol of evil , a national actor, in the Muslim World - None other than SADDAM Hussein.

The AYATOLLAHS in Iran could not be connected to Sunni sponsors of terrorism.

Bush had a Democratic ally in Congress in the pursuit of the new doctrine of “anticipatory self-defense.” Against Iraq - after all Osama Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia and we could not invade our ‘friends’ who created the anti western civilization monster that Bin Laden became.

That Democrat ally was not Joe Biden —far from it - it was another DICK - Dick Gephardt.

If you were not consciously participating in the post-9/11/01 world hopefully this will bring you back to the facts and reality of the time.

What Joe Biden's Iraq war vote says about his style of politics​

In the summer of 2002, less than a year after the horrific 9/11 attacks, the Bush-Cheney administration initiated a PR campaign to win support for the idea of attacking the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. In a speech at the national conference of Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vice President Dick Cheney proclaimed, “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.” Actually, that was a lie.​

I showed the facts. You on the other hand are interested on in propaganda....I often wondered what happened to al Shahhaf.... now I know...

 

[struth]

the facts and reality show

If you were truly interested in facts and reality you would be able to transport your mind back to the one year anniversary of the Al Qaeda attacks that politucakkt embarrassed Bush Administration allowed to happen on its watch.

Politically it dawned on that Administration to pin the blame on the best symbol of evil , a national actor, in the Muslim World - None other than SADDAM Hussein.

The AYATOLLAHS in Iran could not be connected to Sunni sponsors of terrorism.

Bush had a Democratic ally in Congress in the pursuit of the new doctrine of “anticipatory self-defense.” Against Iraq - after all Osama Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia and we could not invade our ‘friends’ who created the anti western civilization monster that Bin Laden became.

That Democrat ally was not Joe Biden —far from it - it was another DICK - Dick Gephardt.

If you were not consciously participating in the post-9/11/01 world hopefully this will bring you back to the facts and reality of the time.

What Joe Biden's Iraq war vote says about his style of politics​

In the summer of 2002, less than a year after the horrific 9/11 attacks, the Bush-Cheney administration initiated a PR campaign to win support for the idea of attacking the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. In a speech at the national conference of Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vice President Dick Cheney proclaimed, “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.” Actually, that was a lie.​

The Saudis revoked OBL's citizenship in 1996 and declared AQ a terrorist organization.

Yes, but the propagandist still want to blame the Saudi Govt for 9/11 in their efforts to defend Iran, Saddam, and AQ...it's a backdoor way of attempting to in fact blame the USA for 9/11.....you know the "chickens have come home to roost" types...

 

[surada]

the facts and reality show

If you were truly interested in facts and reality you would be able to transport your mind back to the one year anniversary of the Al Qaeda attacks that politucakkt embarrassed Bush Administration allowed to happen on its watch.

Politically it dawned on that Administration to pin the blame on the best symbol of evil , a national actor, in the Muslim World - None other than SADDAM Hussein.

The AYATOLLAHS in Iran could not be connected to Sunni sponsors of terrorism.

Bush had a Democratic ally in Congress in the pursuit of the new doctrine of “anticipatory self-defense.” Against Iraq - after all Osama Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia and we could not invade our ‘friends’ who created the anti western civilization monster that Bin Laden became.

That Democrat ally was not Joe Biden —far from it - it was another DICK - Dick Gephardt.

If you were not consciously participating in the post-9/11/01 world hopefully this will bring you back to the facts and reality of the time.

What Joe Biden's Iraq war vote says about his style of politics​

In the summer of 2002, less than a year after the horrific 9/11 attacks, the Bush-Cheney administration initiated a PR campaign to win support for the idea of attacking the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. In a speech at the national conference of Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vice President Dick Cheney proclaimed, “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.” Actually, that was a lie.​

The Saudis revoked OBL's citizenship in 1996 and declared AQ a terrorist organization.

Yes, but the propagandist still want to blame the Saudi Govt for 9/11 in their efforts to defend Iran, Saddam, and AQ...it's a backdoor way of attempting to in fact blame the USA for 9/11.....you know the "chickens have come home to roost" types...

That doesn't make much sense. The 9-11 plot was small and tightly held.. It only cost about a half million dollars and there was NO STATE ACTOR. Bush was just determined to take down Saddam. That's what the Israelis wanted since Clean Break Strategy.

Struth, some Americans have this insane notion that they need to fix other countries.. Reform their government, reform their religion and their culture.. change their heritage and traditions. Its always a disaster. The invasion of Iraq was one of the most stupid foreign policy blunders of the past century.

 

[struth]

the facts and reality show

If you were truly interested in facts and reality you would be able to transport your mind back to the one year anniversary of the Al Qaeda attacks that politucakkt embarrassed Bush Administration allowed to happen on its watch.

Politically it dawned on that Administration to pin the blame on the best symbol of evil , a national actor, in the Muslim World - None other than SADDAM Hussein.

The AYATOLLAHS in Iran could not be connected to Sunni sponsors of terrorism.

Bush had a Democratic ally in Congress in the pursuit of the new doctrine of “anticipatory self-defense.” Against Iraq - after all Osama Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia and we could not invade our ‘friends’ who created the anti western civilization monster that Bin Laden became.

That Democrat ally was not Joe Biden —far from it - it was another DICK - Dick Gephardt.

If you were not consciously participating in the post-9/11/01 world hopefully this will bring you back to the facts and reality of the time.

What Joe Biden's Iraq war vote says about his style of politics​

In the summer of 2002, less than a year after the horrific 9/11 attacks, the Bush-Cheney administration initiated a PR campaign to win support for the idea of attacking the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. In a speech at the national conference of Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vice President Dick Cheney proclaimed, “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.” Actually, that was a lie.​

The Saudis revoked OBL's citizenship in 1996 and declared AQ a terrorist organization.

Yes, but the propagandist still want to blame the Saudi Govt for 9/11 in their efforts to defend Iran, Saddam, and AQ...it's a backdoor way of attempting to in fact blame the USA for 9/11.....you know the "chickens have come home to roost" types...

That doesn't make much sense. The 9-11 plot was small and tightly held.. It only cost about a half million dollars and there was NO STATE ACTOR. Bush was just determined to take down Saddam. That's what the Israelis wanted since Clean Break Strategy.

Struth, some Americans have this insane notion that they need to fix other countries.. Reform their government, reform their religion and their culture.. change their heritage and traditions. Its always a disaster. The invasion of Iraq was one of the most stupid foreign policy blunders of the past century.

it was the US policy since 1998 to take out saddam.

 

[surada]

the facts and reality show

If you were truly interested in facts and reality you would be able to transport your mind back to the one year anniversary of the Al Qaeda attacks that politucakkt embarrassed Bush Administration allowed to happen on its watch.

Politically it dawned on that Administration to pin the blame on the best symbol of evil , a national actor, in the Muslim World - None other than SADDAM Hussein.

The AYATOLLAHS in Iran could not be connected to Sunni sponsors of terrorism.

Bush had a Democratic ally in Congress in the pursuit of the new doctrine of “anticipatory self-defense.” Against Iraq - after all Osama Bin Laden was from Saudi Arabia and we could not invade our ‘friends’ who created the anti western civilization monster that Bin Laden became.

That Democrat ally was not Joe Biden —far from it - it was another DICK - Dick Gephardt.

If you were not consciously participating in the post-9/11/01 world hopefully this will bring you back to the facts and reality of the time.

What Joe Biden's Iraq war vote says about his style of politics​

In the summer of 2002, less than a year after the horrific 9/11 attacks, the Bush-Cheney administration initiated a PR campaign to win support for the idea of attacking the regime of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. In a speech at the national conference of Veterans of Foreign Wars, Vice President Dick Cheney proclaimed, “Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us.” Actually, that was a lie.​

The Saudis revoked OBL's citizenship in 1996 and declared AQ a terrorist organization.

Yes, but the propagandist still want to blame the Saudi Govt for 9/11 in their efforts to defend Iran, Saddam, and AQ...it's a backdoor way of attempting to in fact blame the USA for 9/11.....you know the "chickens have come home to roost" types...

That doesn't make much sense. The 9-11 plot was small and tightly held.. It only cost about a half million dollars and there was NO STATE ACTOR. Bush was just determined to take down Saddam. That's what the Israelis wanted since Clean Break Strategy.

Struth, some Americans have this insane notion that they need to fix other countries.. Reform their government, reform their religion and their culture.. change their heritage and traditions. Its always a disaster. The invasion of Iraq was one of the most stupid foreign policy blunders of the past century.

it was the US policy since 1998 to take out saddam.

Not really, but the dual citizen signatories of the PNAC were pushing Clinton.. He was just too smart to take the bait. The PNAC letter was based on Bibi's Clean Break Strategy.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

it was the US policy since 1998 to take out saddam.

Not the way GWB did it in March 2003. The idea then was to support Iraqi efforts to do it themselves. So you are lying every time you bring that ridiculous unrelated to 2003 point up.

 

[NotfooledbyW]

Why did you post Blix-Jan27 reporting on January 27 2003 that Iraq was complying when you are trying to make the argument that Blix was not complying?

Why won’t you answer the question :

Why did you post Blix-Jan27 reporting on January 27 2003 that Iraq was complying when you are trying to make the argument that Blix was not complying?

 

[struth]

it was the US policy since 1998 to take out saddam.

Not the way GWB did it in March 2003. The idea then was to support Iraqi efforts to do it themselves. So you are lying every time you bring that ridiculous unrelated to 2003 point up.

they never stated away it was broad left it up to the C and C.

you know this