Like Him Or Hate Him...Romney DEAD ON...2007...IRAQ

The T

George S. Patton Party
May 24, 2009
48,111
5,582
1,773
What USED TO BE A REPUBLIC RUN BY TYRANTS
Mitt Romney Predicted What’s Happening In Iraq Now In 2007

Just as Romeny was correct regarding RUSSIA in which he was laughed at by OBAMA on stage...

My...MY...

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W_t-YCnZKg8&feature=player_embedded]Romney In 2007 Predicts What Is Happening In Iraq With Specifics - YouTube[/ame]

Obama BOTS?

What have YOU to say for Obama making prophecy come true?

FAILURE be Obama's Name...and ALL that support his sorry ass.
 
We made a terrible mistake in not electing Romney when we had the chance. He can think ahead.
 
Psychic Republicans. Be afraid, liberals! Be very afraid!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY]Cheney in 1994 on Iraq - YouTube[/ame]
 
What? I couldn't hear you over Dick Cheney describing an invasion of Iraq as a long, pointless nightmare.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YENbElb5-xY]Cheney in 1994 on Iraq - YouTube[/ame]
 
Holy shit, Romney is a political moron. Most people with a functioning brain knew long before 2007 what was going to happen in Iraq after allied forces pulled out. Those sectarian/tribal lunatics are back to doing what they've always done. Toppling Saddam was a very, very stupid thing to do. Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool of religious lunatics.
 
Holy shit, Romney is a political moron. Most people with a functioning brain knew long before 2007 what was going to happen in Iraq after allied forces pulled out. Those sectarian/tribal lunatics are back to doing what they've always done. Toppling Saddam was a very, very stupid thing to do. Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool of religious lunatics.

Obama didn't seem to know.
 
Holy shit, Romney is a political moron. Most people with a functioning brain knew long before 2007 what was going to happen in Iraq after allied forces pulled out. Those sectarian/tribal lunatics are back to doing what they've always done. Toppling Saddam was a very, very stupid thing to do. Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool of religious lunatics.

Obama didn't seem to know.

Obama didn't topple Saddam.
 
Holy shit, Romney is a political moron. Most people with a functioning brain knew long before 2007 what was going to happen in Iraq after allied forces pulled out. Those sectarian/tribal lunatics are back to doing what they've always done. Toppling Saddam was a very, very stupid thing to do. Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool of religious lunatics.

Obama didn't seem to know.

Obama didn't topple Saddam.

No shit, Sherlock.
 
Holy shit, Romney is a political moron. Most people with a functioning brain knew long before 2007 what was going to happen in Iraq after allied forces pulled out. Those sectarian/tribal lunatics are back to doing what they've always done. Toppling Saddam was a very, very stupid thing to do. Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool of religious lunatics.

Obama didn't seem to know.

Really? He was against the Iraq invasion.
 
Holy shit, Romney is a political moron. Most people with a functioning brain knew long before 2007 what was going to happen in Iraq after allied forces pulled out. Those sectarian/tribal lunatics are back to doing what they've always done. Toppling Saddam was a very, very stupid thing to do. Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool of religious lunatics.
...killed his own people...mutilated women's genitals...gassed women and children...

...what else could on possibly want from a leader?
 
Psychic Republicans. Be afraid, liberals! Be very afraid!

Cheney in 1994 on Iraq - YouTube

...............................................

I thank you for this remembrance of Cheney, and he was a smart man, and a man with guts, a real American...and he probably got it right in what he said then. Everybody ought to watch that tape of Cheney talking about what to do about Iraq in 1994.

And, I wish someone with more expertise and energy and youth than me would take up the project of collecting the Liberal Media Conniption that followed Cheney's comments. He and Bush I were called fools for not taking out the dangerous psychopathic Saddam Hussein when all we had to do was chase a thoroughly defeated, very cowardly army Army out of Baghdad.

The Liberal Press eviscerated them. I was, and am, convinced, that if Bush II made an error in judgment in invading Iraq to take down a psychopathic Saddam Hussein by chasing a thoroughly defeated and cowardly Army out of Baghdad...it was prompted in part by the memory of the HELL the Liberal Press gave Bush I for not doing the exact same thing.

But between the two decisions that each Bush had to make over the same issue, there was one small fact to be considered...the vicious attack on New York City by psychopaths who actually constitute young Saddam Husseins.

It is an interesting phenomenon how Party Fervor can confuse things. I am down in the Mississippi, and still angrier about what happened in New York and more fearful that it will happen to New York again...apparently than folks in New York.

The next attack may well be a dirty bomb. Do you think they will waste it on Mississippi.

Cheney and the Bushes fought the good fight as they saw the light to fight it.

Was the Liberal Media going to second guess them no matter what they did?

Hell Yes.
 
Mitt was right. He should have one but I don't want him to deal with a third run. The GOP would never unite around him. And I can't blame them though I don't think he's as moderate as most of his critics feel he is. And I don't think a lot of popular GOP 2016 choices are as tea-party as the conservatives think they are
 
Last edited:
Holy shit, Romney is a political moron. Most people with a functioning brain knew long before 2007 what was going to happen in Iraq after allied forces pulled out. Those sectarian/tribal lunatics are back to doing what they've always done. Toppling Saddam was a very, very stupid thing to do. Saddam kept the lid on that cesspool of religious lunatics.
...killed his own people...mutilated women's genitals...gassed women and children...

...what else could on possibly want from a leader?

One that would keep his country from causing WWIII.

But that is what our neo-cons want, one way or another.
 
When we took out Saddam the US military replaced Saddam's role in keeping the country stitched together, when the US military left there was nothing to take the US military's place...and thus all the old feuds that have existed for centuries suddenly came out of the wood work. Anyone could've seen this coming.

The only real question left is exactly how long the US was/is going to commit it's money and lives to the region to keep the artificial nation stitched together.
 
Everyone knew what was going to happen in Iraq. Republicans installed the worst possible government and the only people who didn't know it was the GOP. Iraq was hicks trying to show the "elites" how it's done. And they showed everyone alright.
 
A woman at an Ask Mitt Anything forum earlier today in Iowa raised the question again, asking whether any of Mr. Romney’s five sons are serving in the military, adding pointedly, “If none of them are, how do they plan to support this war on terrorism by enlisting in our U.S. military?”

Although his campaign said his remarks were taken out of context, Mr. Romney’s response is drawing criticism, because he said, in part, “one of the ways my sons are showing support for our nation is helping to get me elected.”

Questions About Romney’s Sons and Military Service

Fighting wars is for the "little people".

The last thing they heard after "let them eat cake" was "off with his head".
 
Psychic Republicans. Be afraid, liberals! Be very afraid!

Cheney in 1994 on Iraq - YouTube

...............................................

I thank you for this remembrance of Cheney, and he was a smart man, and a man with guts, a real American...and he probably got it right in what he said then. Everybody ought to watch that tape of Cheney talking about what to do about Iraq in 1994.

And, I wish someone with more expertise and energy and youth than me would take up the project of collecting the Liberal Media Conniption that followed Cheney's comments. He and Bush I were called fools for not taking out the dangerous psychopathic Saddam Hussein when all we had to do was chase a thoroughly defeated, very cowardly army Army out of Baghdad.

The Liberal Press eviscerated them. I was, and am, convinced, that if Bush II made an error in judgment in invading Iraq to take down a psychopathic Saddam Hussein by chasing a thoroughly defeated and cowardly Army out of Baghdad...it was prompted in part by the memory of the HELL the Liberal Press gave Bush I for not doing the exact same thing.

But between the two decisions that each Bush had to make over the same issue, there was one small fact to be considered...the vicious attack on New York City by psychopaths who actually constitute young Saddam Husseins.

It is an interesting phenomenon how Party Fervor can confuse things. I am down in the Mississippi, and still angrier about what happened in New York and more fearful that it will happen to New York again...apparently than folks in New York.

The next attack may well be a dirty bomb. Do you think they will waste it on Mississippi.

Cheney and the Bushes fought the good fight as they saw the light to fight it.

Was the Liberal Media going to second guess them no matter what they did?

Hell Yes.

Iraq had NOTHING to do with the attack on 9/11. Let me REPEAT that again.

Iraq had NOTHING to do with the attack on 9/11.
 

Forum List

Back
Top