Why would anyone continue to claim the iraqi war was a failure?

[GoneBezerk]

Again idiot....name these laws he violated.

NATO would not stop the US from doing anything, we lead NATO.....you ******* moron.

WHO is going to so-called "lawfully" arrest Bush? A couple left-wing turds like you? Try it, the Secret Service would shoot you dead in a second.

As for Bush's travel, maybe he doesn't want to bring such a large footprint of agents like Obamination does when he travels. Bush is happy hanging out in Texas, a state bigger than most European countries. But keep inventing these stories in your head, it keeps you from chasing little boys at the playground.

Tardzerk can't even comprehend the post to which he responded. Lawfully arresting a former US president is neither terrorism or act of war, merely law enforcement. The European Union, NATO, and the UN would prevent the USA from doing anything militarily about it,. Why do you think the senior bushies have traveled so very little (compared to the principals of other previous administrations) and almost never now? They are criminals, tard, and they know it.

Let Bush fly to Paris or The Hague without agreements of non-arrest and only a few body guards, and you will find out immediately what laws he is alleged to have violated. BHO continues to wind down the incredibles messes in Iraq and Afghanistan created by the neo-cons. Once Romney replaces him, very little presence will remain in either nation. Watch and learn, little one.

TardyZerk continues to babble nothing new or worthy. Absolutely sinks the neo-con Bush positions on the war all by himself. He is worse than JRK and that is saying a bunch.

Dumbfuck, what are these laws? Name them. Also, which European country is going to arrest a former US POTUS protected by the US Secret Service. Can you say an act of war, terrorism by kidnapping an American citizen like our former leader in Europe? Good God you're dumber than shit. You liberals are kooks of the highest order among tin foil hat club members.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Tardzerk now is repeating questions, to which he has been answered, and insults, the which no one cares. He remains corrected until he comes up with something worthwhile. Tardzerk can't even comprehend the post to which he responded. Lawfully arresting a former US president is neither terrorism or act of war, merely law enforcement. The European Union, NATO, and the UN would prevent the USA from doing anything militarily about it,. Why do you think the senior bushies have traveled so very little (compared to the principals of other previous administrations) and almost never now? They are criminals, tard, and they know it.

Let Bush fly to Paris or The Hague without agreements of non-arrest and only a few body guards, and you will find out immediately what laws he is alleged to have violated. BHO continues to wind down the incredibles messes in Iraq and Afghanistan created by the neo-cons. Once Romney replaces him, very little presence will remain in either nation. Watch and learn, little one.

Dumbfuck, what are these laws? Name them. Also, which European country is going to arrest a former US POTUS protected by the US Secret Service. Can you say an act of war, terrorism by kidnapping an American citizen like our former leader in Europe? Good God you're dumber than shit. You liberals are kooks of the highest order among tin foil hat club members.

Again idiot....name these laws he violated. NATO would not stop the US from doing anything, we lead NATO.....you ******* moron. WHO is going to so-called "lawfully" arrest Bush? A couple left-wing turds like you? Try it, the Secret Service would shoot you dead in a second. As for Bush's travel, maybe he doesn't want to bring such a large footprint of agents like Obamination does when he travels. Bush is happy hanging out in Texas, a state bigger than most European countries. But keep inventing these stories in your head, it keeps you from chasing little boys at the playground.

 

[Bloodline]

Not the help, the cooperation.
In intelligence that is a big difference.
CIA is an intelligence operation, not a policy and strategy entity. CIA has no military power.

For instance if the CIA didn't have the power to "shape" policy then how was Congress led to war with MOST of the C.I.A.'s top officials advising against it?

Oh yeah.....Donald Rumsfeld/Dick Cheney's clandestine "Office of Special Plans was cherrypicking raw, unvetted C.I.A. intel and presenting it to Congress as the polished product using the qualifier that "all of the other intel agencies around the world concur."

What they neglected to tell Congress was that all of the other world intel agencies were simply "concurring" on the same garbage they were presenting to Congress!

Quite a loop huh?

It did influence policy to the tune of over three thousand dead American soldiers though.

Tune in next for someone to chime in "yeah....but Clinton saw the same intel back in (fill in the blank)."

So what? He didn't use it to invade Iraq did he?

Maybe he was a little smarter than G.W. ya thank?

CIA is one of 16 intelligence agencies.
If you want I can tell you how the CIA has only a limited intelligence gathering purpose.
For your information the CIA is a CIVILIAN intelligence agency of the government.
They report to the Director of National Intelligence.
Now please tell us how much influence they have over the military intelligence branches that report directly to the JCS and that chain of command.
Politically, who do you think has more influence on the commander in chief, CIA or the other 15 intelligence agencies that have been training and planning operational on the ground strategy in conjunction with every branch of the military?
"cherry picking" is done in every intelligence gathering operation.
Monday morning QBing is always there when things go wrong and when they go right we have the Obamas there to take the credit for it.
Operational intelligence is not an exact science. I know. I do it for a living for 34 years.

So what is your point?

Are you suggesting that the Bush administration got it wrong on Iraq due to flaws in the intelligence gathering process?

Because the Congressional record doesn't reflect that. Either does the 9-11 Commission's report.

No, most of the EVIDENCE details a concerted, aggressive program to shape the intel to suit the intentions of the Bush administration through the ommission of crucial caveats on information, the revival of already debunked and obsolete information presented as current fact, the suppression of any intel that didn't support plans for invasion, and so on.

I'm sure you are familiar with the Downing Street Memos?

Let me guess though....you were brainwashed by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh long ago into parroting their mantra that these memos were "debunked," are "bullshit," were just a "vast left wing conspiracy" designed to discredit Bush, ect?

I would challenge you then to tell me HOW they were "debunked?" They exist. They are very REAL!

How about the Office of Special Plans?

Ever heard of that Mr. secret agent man LMFAO!

 

[GoneBezerk]

Oh, nice jab at retarded people with the Tard comment. You think calling me a Tard (retard) is an insult, because it is an insult to be mentally retarded. That shows how much of a scumbag you are when you insult retarded people.

I don't use that word compared to idiot, dumbass, etc because retarded people can't help their mental functions, whereas dumb people like you are uneducated after being given a normal brain.

So congrats on winning the asshole award on this board today for insulting retarded people over their condition. Dragging them into your scummy world to try to insult me and others here shows you are beyond help.

Tardzerk now is repeating questions, to which he has been answered, and insults, the which no one cares. He remains corrected until he comes up with something worthwhile. Tardzerk can't even comprehend the post to which he responded. Lawfully arresting a former US president is neither terrorism or act of war, merely law enforcement. The European Union, NATO, and the UN would prevent the USA from doing anything militarily about it,. Why do you think the senior bushies have traveled so very little (compared to the principals of other previous administrations) and almost never now? They are criminals, tard, and they know it.

Let Bush fly to Paris or The Hague without agreements of non-arrest and only a few body guards, and you will find out immediately what laws he is alleged to have violated. BHO continues to wind down the incredibles messes in Iraq and Afghanistan created by the neo-cons. Once Romney replaces him, very little presence will remain in either nation. Watch and learn, little one.

Dumbfuck, what are these laws? Name them. Also, which European country is going to arrest a former US POTUS protected by the US Secret Service. Can you say an act of war, terrorism by kidnapping an American citizen like our former leader in Europe? Good God you're dumber than shit. You liberals are kooks of the highest order among tin foil hat club members.

Again idiot....name these laws he violated. NATO would not stop the US from doing anything, we lead NATO.....you ******* moron. WHO is going to so-called "lawfully" arrest Bush? A couple left-wing turds like you? Try it, the Secret Service would shoot you dead in a second. As for Bush's travel, maybe he doesn't want to bring such a large footprint of agents like Obamination does when he travels. Bush is happy hanging out in Texas, a state bigger than most European countries. But keep inventing these stories in your head, it keeps you from chasing little boys at the playground.

 

[GoneBezerk]

You better hope Assad's WMDs don't have Saddam's fingerprints on them.....

Oh, but you are so educated by left-wing kook websites that know "the truth."

For instance if the CIA didn't have the power to "shape" policy then how was Congress led to war with MOST of the C.I.A.'s top officials advising against it?

Oh yeah.....Donald Rumsfeld/Dick Cheney's clandestine "Office of Special Plans was cherrypicking raw, unvetted C.I.A. intel and presenting it to Congress as the polished product using the qualifier that "all of the other intel agencies around the world concur."

What they neglected to tell Congress was that all of the other world intel agencies were simply "concurring" on the same garbage they were presenting to Congress!

Quite a loop huh?

It did influence policy to the tune of over three thousand dead American soldiers though.

Tune in next for someone to chime in "yeah....but Clinton saw the same intel back in (fill in the blank)."

So what? He didn't use it to invade Iraq did he?

Maybe he was a little smarter than G.W. ya thank?

CIA is one of 16 intelligence agencies.
If you want I can tell you how the CIA has only a limited intelligence gathering purpose.
For your information the CIA is a CIVILIAN intelligence agency of the government.
They report to the Director of National Intelligence.
Now please tell us how much influence they have over the military intelligence branches that report directly to the JCS and that chain of command.
Politically, who do you think has more influence on the commander in chief, CIA or the other 15 intelligence agencies that have been training and planning operational on the ground strategy in conjunction with every branch of the military?
"cherry picking" is done in every intelligence gathering operation.
Monday morning QBing is always there when things go wrong and when they go right we have the Obamas there to take the credit for it.
Operational intelligence is not an exact science. I know. I do it for a living for 34 years.

So what is your point?

Are you suggesting that the Bush administration got it wrong on Iraq due to flaws in the intelligence gathering process?

Because the Congressional record doesn't reflect that. Either does the 9-11 Commission's report.

No, most of the EVIDENCE details a concerted, aggressive program to shape the intel to suit the intentions of the Bush administration through the ommission of crucial caveats on information, the revival of already debunked and obsolete information presented as current fact, the suppression of any intel that didn't support plans for invasion, and so on.

I'm sure you are familiar with the Downing Street Memos?

Let me guess though....you were brainwashed by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh long ago into parroting their mantra that these memos were "debunked," are "bullshit," were just a "vast left wing conspiracy" designed to discredit Bush, ect?

I would challenge you then to tell me HOW they were "debunked?" They exist. They are very REAL!

How about the Office of Special Plans?

Ever heard of that Mr. secret agent man LMFAO!

 

[Gadawg73]

Tardzerk can't even comprehend the post to which he responded. Lawfully arresting a former US president is neither terrorism or act of war, merely law enforcement. The European Union, NATO, and the UN would prevent the USA from doing anything militarily about it,. Why do you think the senior bushies have traveled so very little (compared to the principals of other previous administrations) and almost never now? They are criminals, tard, and they know it.

Let Bush fly to Paris or The Hague without agreements of non-arrest and only a few body guards, and you will find out immediately what laws he is alleged to have violated. BHO continues to wind down the incredibles messes in Iraq and Afghanistan created by the neo-cons. Once Romney replaces him, very little presence will remain in either nation. Watch and learn, little one.

TardyZerk continues to babble nothing new or worthy. Absolutely sinks the neo-con Bush positions on the war all by himself. He is worse than JRK and that is saying a bunch.

Dumbfuck, what are these laws? Name them. Also, which European country is going to arrest a former US POTUS protected by the US Secret Service. Can you say an act of war, terrorism by kidnapping an American citizen like our former leader in Europe? Good God you're dumber than shit. You liberals are kooks of the highest order among tin foil hat club members.

You are claiming that George Bush is a criminal?

 

[Gadawg73]

For instance if the CIA didn't have the power to "shape" policy then how was Congress led to war with MOST of the C.I.A.'s top officials advising against it?

Oh yeah.....Donald Rumsfeld/Dick Cheney's clandestine "Office of Special Plans was cherrypicking raw, unvetted C.I.A. intel and presenting it to Congress as the polished product using the qualifier that "all of the other intel agencies around the world concur."

What they neglected to tell Congress was that all of the other world intel agencies were simply "concurring" on the same garbage they were presenting to Congress!

Quite a loop huh?

It did influence policy to the tune of over three thousand dead American soldiers though.

Tune in next for someone to chime in "yeah....but Clinton saw the same intel back in (fill in the blank)."

So what? He didn't use it to invade Iraq did he?

Maybe he was a little smarter than G.W. ya thank?

CIA is one of 16 intelligence agencies.
If you want I can tell you how the CIA has only a limited intelligence gathering purpose.
For your information the CIA is a CIVILIAN intelligence agency of the government.
They report to the Director of National Intelligence.
Now please tell us how much influence they have over the military intelligence branches that report directly to the JCS and that chain of command.
Politically, who do you think has more influence on the commander in chief, CIA or the other 15 intelligence agencies that have been training and planning operational on the ground strategy in conjunction with every branch of the military?
"cherry picking" is done in every intelligence gathering operation.
Monday morning QBing is always there when things go wrong and when they go right we have the Obamas there to take the credit for it.
Operational intelligence is not an exact science. I know. I do it for a living for 34 years.

So what is your point?

Are you suggesting that the Bush administration got it wrong on Iraq due to flaws in the intelligence gathering process?

Because the Congressional record doesn't reflect that. Either does the 9-11 Commission's report.

No, most of the EVIDENCE details a concerted, aggressive program to shape the intel to suit the intentions of the Bush administration through the ommission of crucial caveats on information, the revival of already debunked and obsolete information presented as current fact, the suppression of any intel that didn't support plans for invasion, and so on.

I'm sure you are familiar with the Downing Street Memos?

Let me guess though....you were brainwashed by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh long ago into parroting their mantra that these memos were "debunked," are "bullshit," were just a "vast left wing conspiracy" designed to discredit Bush, ect?

I would challenge you then to tell me HOW they were "debunked?" They exist. They are very REAL!

How about the Office of Special Plans?

Ever heard of that Mr. secret agent man LMFAO!

I do not listen to Limbaugh or Fox News or any of that so what is your point?
I was one of the first here to state correctly that the Bush administration manipulated the intelligence.
Where have I stated otherwise?
Additionally, the Bush administration was briefed by the military after the fall of Baghdad and ignored almost all of their advice.
The military and most of the intelligence organizations did not want to disband the fully armed Iraqi Police and The Republican Guard which were over 80,000 at that time and armed to the teeth. Bush did it anyway and that was a massive **** up.
And most of the intel, including from the CIA, was that they would mass and attack troops if we let them go.
And the first road bomb was the next day.
What I am schooling you on IS THE INTELLIGENCE OPERATIONS.
Most of everything you post is all over the map opinion with nothing substantive to back any of it up.
Intelligence IS NOT POLICY AND STRATEGY. All intel is is gathering and reporting. How the executive distorts, slants and sells it is not the work of any intelligence agency including the CIA.

 

[Mac1958]

1) REMOVE SADDAM
DONE
2) STABILIZE COUNTRY
DONE
3) HAVE A REPUBLIC BORN OF THESE EVENTS
DONE

Am missing something here?

Over-simplification. What was the cost to the USA?

We spent a trillion dollars on the war over 8 years, lost 4,500 killed, 30,000 wounded half of which could not return to combat status. We will spend 2 trillion dollars over the next 100 years in disability and healthcare to the wounded vets from Iraq war (estimate I have seen, and assumes the last Iraq vet dies at age 120 as the lifespan gets longer).

None of your stated benefits directly helps the US.

Who ever said it was the US responsibility to remove Saddam? It wasn't. We should have armed his internal opposition to overthrow him if they wanted to, but it wasn't our affair.

No WMD, no involvement in 9/11 = stay out.

It was a bad deal for the US, cost too much and we got too little out of it.

I've tried this many times, and they simply will not admit to the costs.

I'll also add the damaged minds, the destroyed families, and the children who will never see Dad again. But the people with whom you're trying to communicate with simply refuse to acknowledge these costs.

Irony of ironies, these are the same people who claim to care about the troops.

.

 

[bobgnote]

So the "secret" Sesame Street number is 2, eh? I thought it was the lucky number 7? We must invade Iraq SEVEN TIMES!!!!

Problem is, GW and all the wingnuts in creation don't add their collective IQ to three. They make up for the obvious lack of brains, with raw greed.

Hey, IQ-of-2 asshole! You didn't reply to my information, how GW Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld used a lying Iraqi informant, to bullshit Congress, into believing WMDs were in Iraq. You are a piece of shit, for not noticing I posted, how Saddam was a secular Sunni, in charge of a Shiite majority, since he was a CIA asset, 1958. You are a turd-bag, with an IQ of 2, who read right over my post, about how GHW Bush got cold feet, on the road to Basra, so his chimpy kid could get it on, with lies, to invade, again.

You ranting, propped up piece of crap! Reply to all issues in my post. Your time in any US employ was a really bad bargain, for your employer, whether government or private. Since you are stupid, and you will make a really bad impression, stay out of foreign countries, but hey, we don't need you in the US, either.

 

[GoneBezerk]

The kooks claimed Bush and Cheney went in to steal Iraq's oil but today can't show it happened.

They claim Bush and Cheney violated US and international laws but can't show them or who is going to enforce them except some rogue left-wing groups talking shit out both ends.

They try to tie Bush and Cheney to the CIA actions during the Cold War in Iraq which somehow in their demented minds connects Bush and Cheney to supporting Saddam.

They babble non-stop about getting justice even claiming Bush staying in Texas at his age is proof he is hiding from the "world police."

Insanity comes to mind....

 

[Billo_Really]

What a ******* moron....the US never gave the UN authority over the US military and its actions. The US tries to work through the UN which Bush did, but when it is clear the UN is corrupt and the US military needs to take action.....then we take action.

You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?

When Congress ratifies a treaty, it becomes part of our Constitution. So we broke our law, you fuckin' idiot!

Do we need permission from the UN to defend ourselves, dumbfuck? If China attacks Hawaii do we need the UN to give us the OK to shoot back?

Don't change the subject, that is completely irrelevant! We were not attacked by Iraq, you fuckin' moron!

Did Obamination get UN approval to enter Pakistan and kill UBL and his friends??? I don't recall the UN giving Obamination approval to go after terrorists, especially going into a third party country. Come on dumbfuck, you need to connect all your dots.

You mean "third world country".

Man, I feel like I'm talking to a 10 year old!

 

[GoneBezerk]

Ok, so we see you are insane and are stuck on the number 2. Hmmmm, we have a term here in the US about the number 2. It sticks with you.

Oh, so Bush has some secret connection to the CIA's work in 1958? Your rant about Saddam being a Sunni ruling over Shia that align with Iran....doesn't make sense.

You see, we removed Saddam for the safety of other Sunnis in other Arab countries and the safety of Jews in Israel, not to help the Shia in Iran....but your insanity does create wild conspiracy theories......make it "2" conspiracy theories!

So the "secret" Sesame Street number is 2, eh? I thought it was the lucky number 7? We must invade Iraq SEVEN TIMES!!!!

Problem is, GW and all the wingnuts in creation don't add their collective IQ to three. They make up for the obvious lack of brains, with raw greed.

Hey, IQ-of-2 asshole! You didn't reply to my information, how GW Bush, Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld used a lying Iraqi informant, to bullshit Congress, into believing WMDs were in Iraq. You are a piece of shit, for not noticing I posted, how Saddam was a secular Sunni, in charge of a Shiite majority, since he was a CIA asset, 1958. You are a turd-bag, with an IQ of 2, who read right over my post, about how GHW Bush got cold feet, on the road to Basra, so his chimpy kid could get it on, with lies, to invade, again.

You ranting, propped up piece of crap! Reply to all issues in my post. Your time in any US employ was a really bad bargain, for your employer, whether government or private. Since you are stupid, and you will make a really bad impression, stay out of foreign countries, but hey, we don't need you in the US, either.

 

[Gadawg73]

The kooks claimed Bush and Cheney went in to steal Iraq's oil but today can't show it happened.

They claim Bush and Cheney violated US and international laws but can't show them or who is going to enforce them except some rogue left-wing groups talking shit out both ends.

They try to tie Bush and Cheney to the CIA actions during the Cold War in Iraq which somehow in their demented minds connects Bush and Cheney to supporting Saddam.

They babble non-stop about getting justice even claiming Bush staying in Texas at his age is proof he is hiding from the "world police."

Insanity comes to mind....

Well, we did support Saddam with intelligence in his was with Iran. In return we received more than we gave.
There is no world police out to get Bush or Cheney. I agree with you on that.

 

[Bloodline]

You better hope Assad's WMDs don't have Saddam's fingerprints on them.....

Oh, but you are so educated by left-wing kook websites that know "the truth."

CIA is one of 16 intelligence agencies.
If you want I can tell you how the CIA has only a limited intelligence gathering purpose.
For your information the CIA is a CIVILIAN intelligence agency of the government.
They report to the Director of National Intelligence.
Now please tell us how much influence they have over the military intelligence branches that report directly to the JCS and that chain of command.
Politically, who do you think has more influence on the commander in chief, CIA or the other 15 intelligence agencies that have been training and planning operational on the ground strategy in conjunction with every branch of the military?
"cherry picking" is done in every intelligence gathering operation.
Monday morning QBing is always there when things go wrong and when they go right we have the Obamas there to take the credit for it.
Operational intelligence is not an exact science. I know. I do it for a living for 34 years.

So what is your point?

Are you suggesting that the Bush administration got it wrong on Iraq due to flaws in the intelligence gathering process?

Because the Congressional record doesn't reflect that. Either does the 9-11 Commission's report.

No, most of the EVIDENCE details a concerted, aggressive program to shape the intel to suit the intentions of the Bush administration through the ommission of crucial caveats on information, the revival of already debunked and obsolete information presented as current fact, the suppression of any intel that didn't support plans for invasion, and so on.

I'm sure you are familiar with the Downing Street Memos?

Let me guess though....you were brainwashed by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh long ago into parroting their mantra that these memos were "debunked," are "bullshit," were just a "vast left wing conspiracy" designed to discredit Bush, ect?

I would challenge you then to tell me HOW they were "debunked?" They exist. They are very REAL!

How about the Office of Special Plans?

Ever heard of that Mr. secret agent man LMFAO!

Actually left-wind kook websites don't have anything to do with it.

I get MY information from all over the place.

Ok...I'll hope Assad's WMD's don't have Saddam's fingerprint on them lol!

I doubt they will though. You see....Saddam NEVER had functional WMD to secretely ship out of the country under the cover of darkness upon our invasion.

The CIA said so.

You should know that shouldn't you....being an insider and all?

 

[GoneBezerk]

Little boy, you are a joke compared to me.

So we violated our own laws by defending Kuwait in the 90s? Or is it when we were defending Israel and the rest of the middle east from Saddam in 2003? Which one? Uh, they're all connected, dumbfuck.

Saddam attacked Kuwait, but I'm guessing you weren't alive when it happened. Your high school teacher should teach you that on Monday.

Pakistan is a "third party country" since they are not directly involved with our wars. Pakistan is playing us and the terrorists along the border, so they are a third party to the conflict you dumb mother-******.

What a ******* moron....the US never gave the UN authority over the US military and its actions. The US tries to work through the UN which Bush did, but when it is clear the UN is corrupt and the US military needs to take action.....then we take action.

You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?

When Congress ratifies a treaty, it becomes part of our Constitution. So we broke our law, you fuckin' idiot!

Do we need permission from the UN to defend ourselves, dumbfuck? If China attacks Hawaii do we need the UN to give us the OK to shoot back?

Don't change the subject, that is completely irrelevant! We were not attacked by Iraq, you fuckin' moron!

Did Obamination get UN approval to enter Pakistan and kill UBL and his friends??? I don't recall the UN giving Obamination approval to go after terrorists, especially going into a third party country. Come on dumbfuck, you need to connect all your dots.

You mean "third world country".

Man, I feel like I'm talking to a 10 year old!

 

[GoneBezerk]

We sided with the Iraqis vs Iran when Bush was some random businessman in the 80s.

The CIA made friends with people like Saddam during the Cold War because we saw the Soviets as a bigger threat, but these kooks are blaming Bush for it now.

The kooks claimed Bush and Cheney went in to steal Iraq's oil but today can't show it happened.

They claim Bush and Cheney violated US and international laws but can't show them or who is going to enforce them except some rogue left-wing groups talking shit out both ends.

They try to tie Bush and Cheney to the CIA actions during the Cold War in Iraq which somehow in their demented minds connects Bush and Cheney to supporting Saddam.

They babble non-stop about getting justice even claiming Bush staying in Texas at his age is proof he is hiding from the "world police."

Insanity comes to mind....

Well, we did support Saddam with intelligence in his was with Iran. In return we received more than we gave.
There is no world police out to get Bush or Cheney. I agree with you on that.

 

[GoneBezerk]

Saddam had WMDs, the intel community doesn't know exactly how or when it went away.

Does Syria own WMDs???? What does your left-wing kook websites tell you.

FYI....the IAEA admits the Iraq and Syria border was not monitored by them, so moving WMD across that border with Russian help is very, very easy. Those same Russians that supported Saddam until the end and today support Assad.....

You better hope Assad's WMDs don't have Saddam's fingerprints on them.....

Oh, but you are so educated by left-wing kook websites that know "the truth."

So what is your point?

Are you suggesting that the Bush administration got it wrong on Iraq due to flaws in the intelligence gathering process?

Because the Congressional record doesn't reflect that. Either does the 9-11 Commission's report.

No, most of the EVIDENCE details a concerted, aggressive program to shape the intel to suit the intentions of the Bush administration through the ommission of crucial caveats on information, the revival of already debunked and obsolete information presented as current fact, the suppression of any intel that didn't support plans for invasion, and so on.

I'm sure you are familiar with the Downing Street Memos?

Let me guess though....you were brainwashed by Fox News and Rush Limbaugh long ago into parroting their mantra that these memos were "debunked," are "bullshit," were just a "vast left wing conspiracy" designed to discredit Bush, ect?

I would challenge you then to tell me HOW they were "debunked?" They exist. They are very REAL!

How about the Office of Special Plans?

Ever heard of that Mr. secret agent man LMFAO!

Actually left-wind kook websites don't have anything to do with it.

I get MY information from all over the place.

Ok...I'll hope Assad's WMD's don't have Saddam's fingerprint on them lol!

I doubt they will though. You see....Saddam NEVER had functional WMD to secretely ship out of the country under the cover of darkness upon our invasion.

The CIA said so.

You should know that shouldn't you....being an insider and all?

 

[Gadawg73]

What a ******* moron....the US never gave the UN authority over the US military and its actions. The US tries to work through the UN which Bush did, but when it is clear the UN is corrupt and the US military needs to take action.....then we take action.

You're not the sharpest tool in the shed, are you?

When Congress ratifies a treaty, it becomes part of our Constitution. So we broke our law, you fuckin' idiot!

Do we need permission from the UN to defend ourselves, dumbfuck? If China attacks Hawaii do we need the UN to give us the OK to shoot back?

Don't change the subject, that is completely irrelevant! We were not attacked by Iraq, you fuckin' moron!

Did Obamination get UN approval to enter Pakistan and kill UBL and his friends??? I don't recall the UN giving Obamination approval to go after terrorists, especially going into a third party country. Come on dumbfuck, you need to connect all your dots.

You mean "third world country".

Man, I feel like I'm talking to a 10 year old!

No, a treaty does not over ride The United States Constitution.
And that gray area of The Treaties Clause is where we are now and when Bush invaded Iraq.
Patrick Henry at the Convention declared that Treaties, though like a Federal Law, "the object of treaties is the regulation of intercourse with foreign nations, and is EXTERNAL"

And Madison stated "Treaties must be under the authority of The United States, to be within their province".

I don't like it when Bush and other Presidents stretch executive powers but Johnson did it with the Viet Nam war and every President has done it.
Not saying it is right but the Treaties Clause is unclear in many areas.

 

[Gadawg73]

The Senate ratifies treaties, not the Congress.

 

[Billo_Really]

Little boy, you are a joke compared to me.

So we violated our own laws by defending Kuwait in the 90s?

We had UNSC authorization for that one. You don't know what Article 51 says, do you? Maybe you should do your homework first, junior, before you decide to get into a big peoples conversation.

Or is it when we were defending Israel and the rest of the middle east from Saddam in 2003?

Defending against what? Hussein was in his own country and not threatening anyone. God, are stupid!

Which one? Uh, they're all connected, dumbfuck.

Would that be those "dots" you were referring to earlier?

Saddam attacked Kuwait, but I'm guessing you weren't alive when it happened. Your high school teacher should teach you that on Monday.

You guess a lot!

Pakistan is a "third party country" since they are not directly involved with our wars. Pakistan is playing us and the terrorists along the border, so they are a third party to the conflict you dumb mother-******.

**** off, you war-mongering asshole!

We're the terrorists in that part of the world.