This is less about WMDs and more about being al quaeda's air force. If a republican supported those who disemboweled people and ate their entrails I would definitely oppose that. Without wanting to come out and say so, those leaders who have withdrawn their support or never gave it, can't bring themselves to support terrorists. Just the wanton cruelty terrorists do in Syria and in Egypt on a daily basis puts doubt that Assad used chemical weapons and the terrorists are the ones who did.
G.W. Bush EFFED Up Things So Much With Iraq That Even Republicans Are War Weary
- Thread starter MarcATL
- Start date
R.C. Christian
Gold Member
The irony you display in this post is that you're either too uneducated, or too proud to admit the fact that this entire attack on Syria is about taking out Iran. Could you be any more obtuse?
- Moderator
- #103
Bombing Syria is foolish. I would care not for who supports or opposes it. To consider such a foolhardy action is within itself foolhardy.
What does our inability to find WMD in Iraq have to do with Barack Obama wanting to fire Cruise missiles at non essential targets in Syria so he can try to save face? We went into Iraq because a sadistic dictator was ignoring the sanctions imposed on him following the first Gulf War and was attempting to obtain the materials to build his own nuke...just like North Korea. Saddam Hussein had already demonstrated aggression against various neighbors and no hesitation to use WMD's that he had. What "I" find hilarious is that you apparently thought UN sanctions were going to keep Saddam from doing that when the son of the United Nations Secretary General was one of the people brokering oil for weapons deals with Iraq. You're just one more naive progressive that thinks if we just "play nice" that the bad guys will leave us alone.
Missouri_Mike
Diamond Member
- Nov 5, 2012
- 29,991
- 23,957
- 2,405
The difference between the left and the right is the right learns from the mistakes and the left insists on creating more. After 9-11 I was pretty convinced Saddam needed to go and without him the citizens of Iraq would clamor to vote for a secular leader that would lead them into the world, didn't happen. I thought for sure Afghanistan would be the same way, they weren't. Egypt uprising, maybe this would be the one that would get rid of a dictator in favor of freedom. Uh nope, they chose the muslim brotherhood.
I'm pretty much convinced at this point the ME people NEED a dictator and we need one that isn't so radical muslim we can deal with him. If we get rid of that guy we keep getting the radical muslims in charge. Seems to be what the people want. At this point I'm thinking it's in our best interest to let them kill each other off by the millions and in the end jump in the mix and make sure a new dictator comes out on top that we can deal with. I'm pretty much done with any thinking these people need or want freedom or even have the mental capacity to handle freedom. The first thing they do is hand over that freedom to the nearest muslim freak they can find. I'm pretty much done "saving" any of these ME people. They can't be saved, they don't want to be saved, they may as well die from whatever weapons a dictator we can deal with has on hand.
I'm pretty much convinced at this point the ME people NEED a dictator and we need one that isn't so radical muslim we can deal with him. If we get rid of that guy we keep getting the radical muslims in charge. Seems to be what the people want. At this point I'm thinking it's in our best interest to let them kill each other off by the millions and in the end jump in the mix and make sure a new dictator comes out on top that we can deal with. I'm pretty much done with any thinking these people need or want freedom or even have the mental capacity to handle freedom. The first thing they do is hand over that freedom to the nearest muslim freak they can find. I'm pretty much done "saving" any of these ME people. They can't be saved, they don't want to be saved, they may as well die from whatever weapons a dictator we can deal with has on hand.
Because of Bush II and his MASSIVE and CONSTANT lies to push the country into an unecessary war with the wrong country that not only cost countless of lives but left us near total financial collapse he's left the country with pretty much ZERO credibility.
No one wants to hear anything about war anymore, they're just sick of it. Can't believe anything anyone in the government says about it.
Thanks to G.W. Bush.
Good job!
*SMH*
Obama will save war and restore its good name!
GWV5903
Gold Member
Because of Bush II and his MASSIVE and CONSTANT lies to push the country into an unecessary war with the wrong country that not only cost countless of lives but left us near total financial collapse he's left the country with pretty much ZERO credibility.
No one wants to hear anything about war anymore, they're just sick of it. Can't believe anything anyone in the government says about it.
Thanks to G.W. Bush.
Good job!
*SMH*
Hey, no surprise to see you blame Bush for Oblammer's faults, I mean shit he's convinced you for over 5 years, whats another 3 years?
This explains everything, Oblammer could blow up ALL of New York today and it would be 43's fault, problem, dilemma, etc....
I hear Oblammer Care has a limit for shrink fees, better start saving your penny's, you're going to need help....
The2ndAmendment
Gold Member
Wow, is anything NOT Bush's fault?
R
rdean
Guest
He never was attempting to build his own nuke. Never. That's a right wing lie that's to ridiculous to be repeated, except by the ridiculous. And the dictator in N. Korea was never removed. And our own CIA suspect that Saddam didn't use gas on the Kurds, but Iran did. Because of the type of gas used. That's been linked to 20 times at least.
You guys just make up bullshit and repeat it endlessly and then go out "outraged" when I post facts refuting the bullshit.
The funny thing about the nuke is how long Iran's been trying and their lack of success. Seems religious fundamentalism and science don't do well together. Just like here.
deltex1
Gold Member
i am not war weary. i am stupid ***** weary. Five years of The Gonad will do that to you.
Saddam Hussein never attempted to build his own nuke? Really? So kindly explain why Iraqi agents were trying to buy yellow cake uranium?
Then you can take a crack at explaining what reason the Iranians would possibly have for gassing the Kurds? I know you're not the brightest poster here, Deanie but even you should be able to figure out that just because "links" on the internet say that Elvis is alive and living on Mars...doesn't make it so.
AceRothstein
Gold Member
- Sep 8, 2012
- 5,978
- 1,441
- 245
Saddam attempted to build a nuke 30+ years ago.
And the Iraqi agents trying to buy yellow cake uranium never happened. I thought everyone knew this by now.
Wrong. That's been the democrat policy for well over a decade not four years.
Redfish
Diamond Member
you know its true because Chris Matthews told you, right?
AceRothstein
Gold Member
- Sep 8, 2012
- 5,978
- 1,441
- 245
No, there were multiple reports of the Niger uranium documents being forged. The Bush Administration even said that the statements made in the State of the Union should never have been made.
bendog
Diamond Member
In addition, Vanity Fair has found at least 14 instances prior to the 2003 State of the Union in which analysts at the C.I.A., the State Department, or other government agencies who had examined the Niger documents or reports about them raised serious doubts about their legitimacy—only to be rebuffed by Bush-administration officials who wanted to use the material. “They were just relentless,” says Wilkerson, who later prepared Colin Powell’s presentation before the United Nations General Assembly. “You would take it out and they would stick it back in. That was their favorite bureaucratic technique—ruthless relentlessness.”
Craig Unger on Yellowcake Uranium | Vanity Fair
Which isn't to say that Obama is not simply incompetent in for policy. He does have one advantage: no neocons.
Craig Unger on Yellowcake Uranium | Vanity Fair
Which isn't to say that Obama is not simply incompetent in for policy. He does have one advantage: no neocons.
ClosedCaption
Diamond Member
- Sep 15, 2010
- 53,233
- 6,733
- 1,830
Bush never took vacations
Bush never dropped the ball...any ball
Bush never existed unless it was a good outcome then he was there
The Bush years were so great you just don't understand or remember the greatness
Bush never dropped the ball...any ball
Bush never existed unless it was a good outcome then he was there
The Bush years were so great you just don't understand or remember the greatness
The people in the middle east cannot have a form of government that does not include dictatorship. Their culture is tribal. They have no national loyalty, just tribal loyalty. Without a strong dictator willing to crack heads, the nation disintegrates into warring tribes as each battle for ascendancy.
The best dictators are the ones who keep the nation somewhat stable and pose little threat to the nation's neighbors. Assad a unutterably cruel and despotic. But he kept Syria stable and honored the rights of Syria's neighbors.
IlarMeilyr
Liability Reincarnate!
Obumbler takes plenty of vacations. And when not on vacation, he plays a lot anyway.
Obumbler has been known to try to juggle. He has never been able to keep any ball up in the air.
Sadly, Obumbler has existed as President and we have the clusterfuck results to rove it.
Worse yet, there are damn few decent "outcomes" from his stint so far as Bumbler in Chief.
The Obumbler years are so fully hideous, you leftist trout refuse to admit it or even see it since that would require responsibility on your part.
Last edited:
Similar threads
- Poll
New Topics
-
-
-
Ilhan Omar's family winery shut down after Congress demands answers- Started by 1srelluc
- Replies: 1
-
-
