Obama: 'That's the Good Thing as a President, I Can Do Whatever I Want'

[KNB]

"I'm the decider." - George W. Bush, who "decided" to invade Iraq based on complete lies and then used chemical weapons and tortured POWs in secret prisons.

Just one question...
Would you rather see 2,649,000 children die from starvation??
In five years 576,000 children starved BECAUSE SADDAM refused to certify WMD destruction!
Iraq Sanctions Kill Children, U.N. Reports - NYTimes.com
Using 115,000 children starved a year because Saddam refused to certify WMD destruction -- From 1995 to 2013 is 18 years!
If Saddam was still in power i.e. Bush's Liberation of Iraq NEVER OCCURRED,
from 1990 to 2013 OVER 2,649,000 children would have STARVED because of Saddam!

you people talk about compassion,etc.. where were you when these children were starving under Saddam BECAUSE being the
pompous but like Obama he rather see kids starve then certify WMD destruction! Which was all Saddam had to do and sanctions would have been lifted!

YET idiots like you would rather have had Saddam around and 2.649 million more children have starved if Saddam had not been removed!

Really? Saddam didn't register any WMD after 1995? Maybe that's because there weren't any WMD to register?
Iraq and Weapons of Mass Destruction
Report: No Iraq WMDs Made After '91 | Fox News

 

[thereisnospoon]

"I'm the decider." - George W. Bush, who "decided" to invade Iraq based on complete lies and then used chemical weapons and tortured POWs in secret prisons.

Just one question...
Would you rather see 2,649,000 children die from starvation??
In five years 576,000 children starved BECAUSE SADDAM refused to certify WMD destruction!
Iraq Sanctions Kill Children, U.N. Reports - NYTimes.com
Using 115,000 children starved a year because Saddam refused to certify WMD destruction -- From 1995 to 2013 is 18 years!
If Saddam was still in power i.e. Bush's Liberation of Iraq NEVER OCCURRED,
from 1990 to 2013 OVER 2,649,000 children would have STARVED because of Saddam!

you people talk about compassion,etc.. where were you when these children were starving under Saddam BECAUSE being the
pompous but like Obama he rather see kids starve then certify WMD destruction! Which was all Saddam had to do and sanctions would have been lifted!

YET idiots like you would rather have had Saddam around and 2.649 million more children have starved if Saddam had not been removed!

Don't forget the some one million Kurds killed or maimed by Saddam Hussein. Most of whom were GASSED( A WMD)......

 

[KNB]

Who supplied the gas?

Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein

 

[healthmyths]

"I'm the decider." - George W. Bush, who "decided" to invade Iraq based on complete lies and then used chemical weapons and tortured POWs in secret prisons.

I'm pretty sure he had a bipartisan majority vote of Congress before invading, but nice try.

Bipartisan majority of people who were lied to, you mean. Al-Janabi lied, Powell lied, Rumsfeld, Rice, Tenet- they all lied.

There weren't any WMD in Iraq and Bush used white phosphorus against Fallujah, so Bush used the same WMD against Iraq that he lied to the entire world about in order to invade Iraq. This means, "**** George W. Bush and the GOP forever, you god-damned lying motherfucking war criminals."

THEN THESE Democrats LIED ALSO!!!!
EACH ONE of these are democrats... THEY ARE LIARS then as THEY were in favor BEFORE BUSH of removing Saddam!!!
"..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 Ntl. Secur. Advr 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 WHERE'D SHE GET THIS INFORMATION BEFORE BUSH?
"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
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime .... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ....
So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...."Kerry , Jan. 23. 2003.


"Between 1999 and 2001, the U.S. and British-led air forces in Iraq dropped 1.3 million pounds of bombs in response to purported violations of the no-fly zones and anti-aircraft fire from Saddam Hussein.
A sweeping attack, conducted in January of 1999, rained down 25 missiles on Iraqi soil, killing civilians. Clinton said the attack was in response to four planes violating the no-fly zones.
Clinton and British Prime Minister Tony Blair authorized air strikes on more than 100 days in 1999, sometimes several times per day. The bombings were ostensibly in response to Husseins refusal to allow UN weapons inspectors into the country, though critics alleged the move was aimed at deflecting attention from impeachment.
The Raw Story | Clinton bombing of Iraq far exceeded Bush's in run-up to war; Bush 'spikes of activity' questioned

 

[healthmyths]

IDIOTS don't you know how to use the Internet???
The above Democrats ALL concurred.. Saddam had WMDs and this was before Bush!
They all concurred Saddam had to go.. BEFORE BUSH!

BUT once again you idiots forget the very very big picture.. 2.7 million children would have starved if Bush hadn't removed Saddam AS THE ABOVE DEMOCRATS wanted!

AND don't for a minute you idiots NOT blame Saddam! Some of you blame the countries doing the sanctions!
YOU idiots when will you learn? SADDAM all he needed to do was comply with the WMD destruction! He didn't ! The sanctions continued!
and If you idiots had your way Saddam would have starved 2.7 million children!

 

[eagle7_31]

I am truly sorry this total narcissistic arrogant idiot is president!
Obama: 'That's the Good Thing as a President, I Can Do Whatever I Want' | The Weekly Standard

NOT even the arrogant sex hound Clinton had this attitude!

So much for "compromise"... This ranks right up with his "pen and phone" mentality!

But these arrogant fauxny intellectual dummy who supposedly taught Constitutional law???
Pathetic. Sorry example for a president. Does nothing for the office or for the man except illustrate his phoniness!

that is a typical Chicago Democrat. they think they can do anything they want no matter what.

 

[healthmyths]

Who supplied the gas?

Shaking Hands with Saddam Hussein

WHO f...king CARES ? WHO used it dummy! Saddam!

Why are idiots like you constantly blaming the USA when SADDAM was the one that ordered the gassing!

You know dumf..k remarks like that are like the total imbecile that points the gun at his head shoots and then his relatives blame the gun!

GROW a set dummy! THE villain was not the USA but Saddam who gassed his people!!!

 

[Listening]

Didn't we know what a power happy, arrogant affirmative action failure this guy is....already ?

 

[Geaux4it]

Why should any us be surprised that Obama said something so foolish

Thats what card carrying narcissist do.

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

He's our Julius Caesar

 

[healthmyths]

He's our Julius Caesar

YES he is Julius Ceasar AND Nero who fiddled while Rome burned!

 

[candycorn]

IDIOTS don't you know how to use the Internet???
The above Democrats ALL concurred.. Saddam had WMDs and this was before Bush!
They all concurred Saddam had to go.. BEFORE BUSH!

BUT once again you idiots forget the very very big picture.. 2.7 million children would have starved if Bush hadn't removed Saddam AS THE ABOVE DEMOCRATS wanted!

AND don't for a minute you idiots NOT blame Saddam! Some of you blame the countries doing the sanctions!
YOU idiots when will you learn? SADDAM all he needed to do was comply with the WMD destruction! He didn't ! The sanctions continued!
and If you idiots had your way Saddam would have starved 2.7 million children!

Of course what you always leave out are two things...

whether or not the WMDs posed a threat to American interests. Obviously Clinton thought differently about the intel than Bush did. And secondly, after Bush's gang took over CIA they began slanting the intel that found it's way to Congress.

Colin Powell's speech to the UN was based widely on intel gained from a source called "curveball".

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvKVGmAc54c]Curveball interview - Man whose Lie caused Iraq War tells all. - YouTube[/ame]

Powell's speech was in February 2003 but the briefings the congressmen and women received was much earlier. It was revealed later on that the CIA had never actually talked to the source of the bad intel prior to sending in American troops.

It is understandable in post 9/11 that you'd be wanting to strike back at those who attacked. While that is understandable it doesn't apply, of course, to Iraq.

Bush cooked the intel and Congress of course believed it. Perhaps they shouldn't have trusted Bush the same way Boehner doesn't trust Obama. More Americans would be alive today if Congress had been smarter and knew Bush was lying at best (or worst) or was just incompetent at worst (or best).

 

[Interpol]

Conservatives on this board have gotten so cute. They think their ignorance is equal to our intelligence.

The OP does what Republican politicians do, which is to prey on only those dumb enough to not understand what context means.

People like that lady at the Republican event who said Obama should be executed. She'd be nice and dumb enough to buy what this OP is sellin'.

 

[Geaux4it]

Obama is a community organizing thug...

Documented

-Geaux

 

[Geaux4it]

Conservatives on this board have gotten so cute. They think their ignorance is equal to our intelligence.

The OP does what Republican politicians do, which is to prey on only those dumb enough to not understand what context means.

People like that lady at the Republican event who said Obama should be executed. She'd be nice and dumb enough to buy what this OP is sellin'.

I concur with all with the exception; I don't think pubs 'prey' on the dumb while trying to reach the 51%, just the low information ignoramus

-Geaux

 

[healthmyths]

IDIOTS don't you know how to use the Internet???
The above Democrats ALL concurred.. Saddam had WMDs and this was before Bush!
They all concurred Saddam had to go.. BEFORE BUSH!

BUT once again you idiots forget the very very big picture.. 2.7 million children would have starved if Bush hadn't removed Saddam AS THE ABOVE DEMOCRATS wanted!

AND don't for a minute you idiots NOT blame Saddam! Some of you blame the countries doing the sanctions!
YOU idiots when will you learn? SADDAM all he needed to do was comply with the WMD destruction! He didn't ! The sanctions continued!
and If you idiots had your way Saddam would have starved 2.7 million children!

Of course what you always leave out are two things...

whether or not the WMDs posed a threat to American interests. Obviously Clinton thought differently about the intel than Bush did. And secondly, after Bush's gang took over CIA they began slanting the intel that found it's way to Congress.

Colin Powell's speech to the UN was based widely on intel gained from a source called "curveball".

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvKVGmAc54c]Curveball interview - Man whose Lie caused Iraq War tells all. - YouTube[/ame]

Powell's speech was in February 2003 but the briefings the congressmen and women received was much earlier. It was revealed later on that the CIA had never actually talked to the source of the bad intel prior to sending in American troops.

It is understandable in post 9/11 that you'd be wanting to strike back at those who attacked. While that is understandable it doesn't apply, of course, to Iraq.

Bush cooked the intel and Congress of course believed it. Perhaps they shouldn't have trusted Bush the same way Boehner doesn't trust Obama. More Americans would be alive today if Congress had been smarter and knew Bush was lying at best (or worst) or was just incompetent at worst (or best).

So I take it you would prefer 2.7 million children dead from starvation because Saddam wouldn't comply with WMD sanctions?
I take it you would prefer Saddam to have continued
1) Attack UN/US air craft in the "No fly" zone?
2) That Saddam continued to allow children to be starved while he added to the 91 palaces he built with the "Oil for Food" program?
3) "So the Iraq war was, despite all that went wrong, a good thing; the "overwhelming majority" of Iraqis are (and presumably feel) better off because of it"
The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg put the question to Barham Salih, the former prime minister of Iraqi Kurdistan's regional government and a former deputy prime minister of Iraq's federal government.
"But," he added, "it's important to understand where we started from. ... Literally hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were sent to mass graves. Ten years on from the demise of Saddam Hussein, we're still discovering mass graves across Iraq. And Iraqis are better off without Saddam Hussein -- the overwhelming majority of Iraqis are better off without Saddam Hussein."
So the Iraq war was, despite all that went wrong, a good thing; the "overwhelming majority" of Iraqis are (and presumably feel) better off because of it; and the fault for all that has gone wrong is ultimately with Iraqis themselves: It's a remarkable point of view to encounter in June 2013.

10 Years After the Fall of Saddam, How Do Iraqis Look Back on the War? - J.J. Gould - The Atlantic

4) Were you aware that The anthrax attacks following 9/11 seem to be almost completely forgotten today. However, these anthrax attacks were an unalienable part of the actual 9/11 perpetration and not to mention them in this book at least briefly would be a lapse. At least for the sake of history this perpetration has to be remembered. Bio-terrorism -- anthrax attacks following September 11

5) Were you aware that :
"In a major development, potentially as significant as the capture of Saddam Hussein, investigative journalist Richard Miniter says there is evidence to indicate Saddam’s anthrax program was capable of producing the kind of anthrax that hit America shortly after 9/11. Miniter, author of Losing bin Laden, told Accuracy in Media that during November he interviewed U.S. weapons inspector Dr. David Kay in Baghdad and that he was "absolutely shocked and astonished" at the sophistication of the Iraqi program.
anthrax

Given all the above were you aware of these events and situations and articles and FACTS that following the attack on US Soil on 9/11 with 3,000 deaths..
you would want 28 million people to be afraid of people that would live under this??

Ahmad was Uday's chief executioner. Last week, as Iraqis celebrated the death of his former boss and his equally savage younger brother Qusay, he nervously revealed a hideous story. His instructions that day in 1999 were to arrest the two 19-year-olds on the campus of Baghdad's Academy of Fine Arts and deliver them at Radwaniyah. On arrival at the sprawling compound, he was directed to a farm where he found a large cage. Inside, two lions waited. They belonged to Uday. Guards took the two young men from the car and opened the cage door. One of the victims collapsed in terror as they were dragged, screaming and shouting, to meet their fate. Ahmad watched as the students frantically looked for a way of escape. There was none. The lions pounced. 'I saw the head of the first student literally come off his body with the first bite and then had to stand and watch the animals devour the two young men. By the time they were finished there was little left but for the bones and bits and pieces of unwanted flesh,' he recalled last week."
-- Sunday Times, London, July 27, 2003


"Ali would then draw out a pair of pliers and a sharp knife. Gripping the tongue with pliers, he would slice it up with the knife, tossing severed pieces into the street. "'Those punished were too terrified to move, even though they knew I was about to chop off their tongue,' said Ali in his matter-of-fact voice. 'They would just stand there, often praying and calling out for Saddam and Allah to spare them. By then it was too late.

"'I would read them out the verdict and cut off their tongue without any form of anaesthetic. There was always a lot of blood. Some offenders passed out. Others screamed in pain. They would then be given basic medical assistance in an ambulance which would always come with us on such punishment runs. Then they would be thrown in jail.'"

-- Fedayeen Saddam member interviewed in The Sunday Times (London), April 20, 2003
Saddam has reduced his people to abject poverty.
He wiped out families, villages, cities and cultures, and drove four million people into exile.
He killed between 100,000 and 200,000 Kurds. He killed as many as 300,000 Shiites in the uprising after the Persian Gulf war. He killed or displaced 200,000 of the 250,000 marsh Arabs who had created a unique, centuries-old culture in the south. He drained the marshes, an environmental treasure, and turned them into a desert.

And you feel all that should exist today? Saddam killing people? Saddam allowing 2.7 million kids to starve?

That's what you would prefer???
Kind of a sick person aren't you that you are willing to let millions of people live in the above environment with 2.7 million kids starved to death? SICK!

 

[bendog]

He broke protocol and joked. ( a piece of my soul has broken off)

What actually is funny the right misses that he's apparently most at home HOSTING A FRENCH SOCIALIST. LOL

 

[candycorn]

IDIOTS don't you know how to use the Internet???
The above Democrats ALL concurred.. Saddam had WMDs and this was before Bush!
They all concurred Saddam had to go.. BEFORE BUSH!

BUT once again you idiots forget the very very big picture.. 2.7 million children would have starved if Bush hadn't removed Saddam AS THE ABOVE DEMOCRATS wanted!

AND don't for a minute you idiots NOT blame Saddam! Some of you blame the countries doing the sanctions!
YOU idiots when will you learn? SADDAM all he needed to do was comply with the WMD destruction! He didn't ! The sanctions continued!
and If you idiots had your way Saddam would have starved 2.7 million children!

Of course what you always leave out are two things...

whether or not the WMDs posed a threat to American interests. Obviously Clinton thought differently about the intel than Bush did. And secondly, after Bush's gang took over CIA they began slanting the intel that found it's way to Congress.

Colin Powell's speech to the UN was based widely on intel gained from a source called "curveball".

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lvKVGmAc54c]Curveball interview - Man whose Lie caused Iraq War tells all. - YouTube[/ame]

Powell's speech was in February 2003 but the briefings the congressmen and women received was much earlier. It was revealed later on that the CIA had never actually talked to the source of the bad intel prior to sending in American troops.

It is understandable in post 9/11 that you'd be wanting to strike back at those who attacked. While that is understandable it doesn't apply, of course, to Iraq.

Bush cooked the intel and Congress of course believed it. Perhaps they shouldn't have trusted Bush the same way Boehner doesn't trust Obama. More Americans would be alive today if Congress had been smarter and knew Bush was lying at best (or worst) or was just incompetent at worst (or best).

So I take it you would prefer 2.7 million children dead from starvation because Saddam wouldn't comply with WMD sanctions?
I take it you would prefer Saddam to have continued
1) Attack UN/US air craft in the "No fly" zone?
2) That Saddam continued to allow children to be starved while he added to the 91 palaces he built with the "Oil for Food" program?
3) "So the Iraq war was, despite all that went wrong, a good thing; the "overwhelming majority" of Iraqis are (and presumably feel) better off because of it"
The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg put the question to Barham Salih, the former prime minister of Iraqi Kurdistan's regional government and a former deputy prime minister of Iraq's federal government.
"But," he added, "it's important to understand where we started from. ... Literally hundreds of thousands of Iraqis were sent to mass graves. Ten years on from the demise of Saddam Hussein, we're still discovering mass graves across Iraq. And Iraqis are better off without Saddam Hussein -- the overwhelming majority of Iraqis are better off without Saddam Hussein."
So the Iraq war was, despite all that went wrong, a good thing; the "overwhelming majority" of Iraqis are (and presumably feel) better off because of it; and the fault for all that has gone wrong is ultimately with Iraqis themselves: It's a remarkable point of view to encounter in June 2013.

10 Years After the Fall of Saddam, How Do Iraqis Look Back on the War? - J.J. Gould - The Atlantic

4) Were you aware that The anthrax attacks following 9/11 seem to be almost completely forgotten today. However, these anthrax attacks were an unalienable part of the actual 9/11 perpetration and not to mention them in this book at least briefly would be a lapse. At least for the sake of history this perpetration has to be remembered. Bio-terrorism -- anthrax attacks following September 11

5) Were you aware that :
"In a major development, potentially as significant as the capture of Saddam Hussein, investigative journalist Richard Miniter says there is evidence to indicate Saddam’s anthrax program was capable of producing the kind of anthrax that hit America shortly after 9/11. Miniter, author of Losing bin Laden, told Accuracy in Media that during November he interviewed U.S. weapons inspector Dr. David Kay in Baghdad and that he was "absolutely shocked and astonished" at the sophistication of the Iraqi program.
anthrax

Given all the above were you aware of these events and situations and articles and FACTS that following the attack on US Soil on 9/11 with 3,000 deaths..
you would want 28 million people to be afraid of people that would live under this??

Ahmad was Uday's chief executioner. Last week, as Iraqis celebrated the death of his former boss and his equally savage younger brother Qusay, he nervously revealed a hideous story. His instructions that day in 1999 were to arrest the two 19-year-olds on the campus of Baghdad's Academy of Fine Arts and deliver them at Radwaniyah. On arrival at the sprawling compound, he was directed to a farm where he found a large cage. Inside, two lions waited. They belonged to Uday. Guards took the two young men from the car and opened the cage door. One of the victims collapsed in terror as they were dragged, screaming and shouting, to meet their fate. Ahmad watched as the students frantically looked for a way of escape. There was none. The lions pounced. 'I saw the head of the first student literally come off his body with the first bite and then had to stand and watch the animals devour the two young men. By the time they were finished there was little left but for the bones and bits and pieces of unwanted flesh,' he recalled last week."
-- Sunday Times, London, July 27, 2003


"Ali would then draw out a pair of pliers and a sharp knife. Gripping the tongue with pliers, he would slice it up with the knife, tossing severed pieces into the street. "'Those punished were too terrified to move, even though they knew I was about to chop off their tongue,' said Ali in his matter-of-fact voice. 'They would just stand there, often praying and calling out for Saddam and Allah to spare them. By then it was too late.

"'I would read them out the verdict and cut off their tongue without any form of anaesthetic. There was always a lot of blood. Some offenders passed out. Others screamed in pain. They would then be given basic medical assistance in an ambulance which would always come with us on such punishment runs. Then they would be thrown in jail.'"

-- Fedayeen Saddam member interviewed in The Sunday Times (London), April 20, 2003
Saddam has reduced his people to abject poverty.
He wiped out families, villages, cities and cultures, and drove four million people into exile.
He killed between 100,000 and 200,000 Kurds. He killed as many as 300,000 Shiites in the uprising after the Persian Gulf war. He killed or displaced 200,000 of the 250,000 marsh Arabs who had created a unique, centuries-old culture in the south. He drained the marshes, an environmental treasure, and turned them into a desert.

And you feel all that should exist today? Saddam killing people? Saddam allowing 2.7 million kids to starve?

That's what you would prefer???
Kind of a sick person aren't you that you are willing to let millions of people live in the above environment with 2.7 million kids starved to death? SICK!

I would prefer you tell the truth but like most dreams; that isn't going to happen. The entire thread is a monument to your half-truths. Did Bush EVER talk about 2.7 million kids being the reason for going to war? No. What you're doing is looking for cause after the fact to justify the encyclopedia of systematic lies told by the administration in an attempt to sell the war.

At least be man enough to admit it and say that the ends justify the means in your mind. I don't see any sign of manhood from you so I won't hold my breath.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[
Thanks for providing the full context of that utterance, which was made in jest based on prior sentence that FOX cut.

BS. Everytime obozo says something stupid, you libs say he was kidding!!!

 

[freedombecki]

"I'm the decider." - George W. Bush, who "decided" to invade Iraq based on complete lies and then used chemical weapons and tortured POWs in secret prisons.

I'm pretty sure he had a bipartisan majority vote of Congress before invading, but nice try.

Bipartisan majority of people who were lied to, you mean. Al-Janabi lied, Powell lied, Rumsfeld, Rice, Tenet- they all lied.

There weren't any WMD in Iraq and Bush used white phosphorus against Fallujah, so Bush used the same WMD against Iraq that he lied to the entire world about in order to invade Iraq. This means, "**** George W. Bush and the GOP forever, you god-damned lying motherfucking war criminals."

You are gravely mistaken.