What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Words have meanings... When did a "Liberation of Iraq" become an "Invasion of Iraq"?

beagle9

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
29,244
Reaction score
7,196
Points
280
WE were starving them? How dumb!
Why didn't Saddam simply do what YOU idiots claim was the case. THERE WERE NO WMDS! That's all he had to do!
So why didn't he do it? Why did HE not sign the UN which you always seem to believe what they say is the gospel i.e. (Israel one of the worst civil rights groups)
but in this case you like Saddam didn't care about the starving children.
Geez any compassionate leader would say... you mean all I have to do is LIE about not having WMDs and the sanctions will be lifted? That's it? So why didn't he?
But to BLAME the sanctions is like blaming the law for you driving 40 miles an hour in a 20 mph school zone. "The law was wrong". The sanctions were wrong!
Hmmmm all Saddam had to do was comply as any law abiding person, (obviously not you...) would do... LIE if he had WMDs.
If WE were concerned that our economic sanctions were starving hundreds of thousands of children.......WE could have lifted them

Then it was Bill Clinton's fault...NOT GWB!
On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright (then U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations)
appeared on a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her "We have heard that half a million children have died.
I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"

and Albright replied "we think the price is worth it."
Albright wrote later that Saddam Hussein, not the sanctions, was to blame.
She criticized Stahl's segment as "amount[ing] to Iraqi propaganda"; said that her question was a loaded question;
wrote "I had fallen into a trap and said something I did not mean"; and regretted coming "across as cold-blooded and cruel".
The segment won an Emmy Award.Albright's "non-denial" was taken by sanctions opponents as confirmation of a high number of sanctions related casualties.
‘We Think the Price Is Worth It’
It was BUSH who pulled the trigger and invaded
BUSH killed 6000 Americans, 100,000 Iraqis and started a civil war

FOR WHAT!
. Yeah for what is right, especially after the Lilly livered libs wouldn't see it through or do the right thing by using the event to liberate the Iraqi people, and to do this by capitalizing on the forward movement towards a better situation for the citizens there. No they cared not for those people, and cared more about defeating their Republican enemy here instead. The proof is hard to deny once you look back, and then bring it all forward in the bigger picture.

So you'd be happy to spend 100,000 American casualties to liberate North Korea, eh?
Would you be happy for the North to get a nuke capability to strike this nation or South Korea finally ? You trying to weaponize the numbers game here ? Not impressed.
 

NYcarbineer

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
117,063
Reaction score
13,866
Points
2,210
Location
Finger Lakes, NY
[] Would you be happy for the North to get a nuke capability to strike this nation or South Korea finally ? You trying to weaponize the numbers game here ? Not impressed.

Is that a yes a no or an I'm gutless so I won't answer?
 
OP
H

healthmyths

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
23,756
Reaction score
6,348
Points
280
Inflicted unnecessarily to support bizarre post 9-11 hysteria
Of course being the ignorant person you would not comprehend that nearly 3.6 million children were saved from starvation.
Again..Read what the experts said about Saddam and his denial of NOT having WMDs.
View attachment 126612

It's not the business of American servicemen and women to die to MAYBE save some starving children.
Besides, we didn't bring any of those kids back to life by invading Iraq.
He doesn't mention that WE were the ones starving them

WE were starving them? How dumb!
Why didn't Saddam simply do what YOU idiots claim was the case. THERE WERE NO WMDS! That's all he had to do!
So why didn't he do it? Why did HE not sign the UN which you always seem to believe what they say is the gospel i.e. (Israel one of the worst civil rights groups)
but in this case you like Saddam didn't care about the starving children.
Geez any compassionate leader would say... you mean all I have to do is LIE about not having WMDs and the sanctions will be lifted? That's it? So why didn't he?
But to BLAME the sanctions is like blaming the law for you driving 40 miles an hour in a 20 mph school zone. "The law was wrong". The sanctions were wrong!
Hmmmm all Saddam had to do was comply as any law abiding person, (obviously not you...) would do... LIE if he had WMDs.
If WE were concerned that our economic sanctions were starving hundreds of thousands of children.......WE could have lifted them

And Saddam could have LIED and said there were NO WMDs!
Why are you defending him?
 
OP
H

healthmyths

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
23,756
Reaction score
6,348
Points
280
This whole thread was to show how words have meanings. And with the MSM using the power of the press by selective changing words,
i.e. under a democrat it was "Liberation of Iraq"... under GOP "Invasion of Iraq".
Under Democrat words of destruction encouragement of our troops.
Under GOP democrats like these encouraged the terrorists!
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "War is lost",
U.S. Rep. Murtha(D) "Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
Senator Kerry(D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"
This Harvard study to have increased violence by 10%...
THE "EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT" asked:
So when those of you that are the mindless robots that take everything the press says as honest,objective, factual you gradually find yourself
becoming less of an American. Less of a person who understands the laws of the land...i.e. you don't shoot cops, you don't burn down businesses.
You become less of an American when you'd rather tear something down then build it up.
You become less of an American who like vicious animals tear at the meat to get a piece rather then work at making the pie bigger!
Fortunately you are becoming the minority.
More and more Americans are finding out the truth without the MSM.
More and more people of the world are finding out that America truly has created what more and more people want.
The freedom to choose where to work. Where to live.
Why else with all the naysayers and people like Obama that apologize for America is that
150 Million Adults Worldwide Would Migrate to the U.S.
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- About 13% of the world's adults -- or more than 640 million people -- say they would like to leave their country permanently. Roughly 150 million of them say they would like to move to the U.S. -- giving it the undisputed title as the world's most desired destination for potential migrants since Gallup started tracking these patterns in 2007.
150 Million Adults Worldwide Would Migrate to the U.S.

If America is as bad as you detractors and Obama AND the MSM make it out to be, why do 150 million adults want to come here?
 

Mac1958

Diamond Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2011
Messages
89,618
Reaction score
33,690
Points
2,280
Location
Opposing Authoritarian Ideological Fundamentalism.
Something happened on September 11, 2001 that changed everything.

After that happened, our Commander in Chief ordered the invasion of Iraq because he was convinced that Saddam had WMD that he was convinced Saddam would use against us.

Yes, one had nothing to do with the other, but our Commander in Chief had made up his mind.

And, as we all know, only one person on the planet had the final authority to order the invasion: The Commander in Chief.
.
Ahhhh, your little biased point of view shines through.

What happened was the paradigm shifted on how to deal with perceived threats to the US. After 911, our foreign policy shifted from a reactive to more preemptive, considering what we saw 19 sandNIGGERS did without a gun to this country.

There were far more people claiming saddam had wmds and wanting to aquire nuclear weapons.

That was confirmed by his own son in laws, who he had executed.

We also know the Clinton administration signed the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs long before Bush ever took office.

We also know wmds were in fact found in Iraq as reported by the NY Times.

All of this has been proven.

It is actually sort of how the communists here protested the Vietnam War as unrighteous. Well, not sure what was so unrighteous about defending our ally South Vietnam from being run over by communist expansion.

You get that everyone? The commie college protests, with hollywood glorified the commies and attacked big bad America. Highlighted by Hanoi Jane giving aid and comfort to the communists. Like the treasonous cunnt she is.

No, the mass media controls our thoughts and they have been traitorous scumbags for many years now.

The whole Iraq situation is a clear example of that. They shape our thoughts and dictate how to think.

Watch this and see how a scumbag treasonous "news" outlet like CNN does it.


Yes, there is power in words and how things are labeled. The sheep just follow along.
Quick Quiz:

There is one (1) person on the planet with the authority to send American troops to war. Who is it

1. The current Commander in Chief of the United States of America
2. The New York Times
3. Commie college protests
4. The Mass Media
5. Bill Clinton
6. Congress

Go ahead.
.
You think I am going to take the time to answer your bullshit rhetorical question?

What I cannot tell is if you acknowledge the shift in policy from reactive to preemptive after 911 and whether or not you think that was a good policy.

Oh, you have the luxury of saddam being worm shit. Then again you left wing truthers are upset he is dead. Wait, I cannot remember liberals protesting the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs under clinton.


Oooops, was that another one of those things where you all booo the firing of Comey only after Trump fired him, even though you all called for his firing for 6 months?

I get it. A bleeding self admitted hillary voter like yourself, don't hold her to account for voting for the war. Ahhhh, she was lied to by bush even though her husband signed the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs.

You think I would take the time to answer your fucking question?
Like millions of others, I was saying "please don't do this", while people like you were screaming "USA! USA! USA!"

We were right.

meltonjoshkia.jpg
. As long as there is evil in the world, and people who want us dead, there will be heroic displays like this forever until we are a nation no more. You trying to use this as a political weapon against your American enemies here ??
Six thousand dead, many more maimed and damaged, trillions spent, for nothing.

Blame others all you want. You own this.
.
 
OP
H

healthmyths

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
23,756
Reaction score
6,348
Points
280
Ahhhh, your little biased point of view shines through.

What happened was the paradigm shifted on how to deal with perceived threats to the US. After 911, our foreign policy shifted from a reactive to more preemptive, considering what we saw 19 sandNIGGERS did without a gun to this country.

There were far more people claiming saddam had wmds and wanting to aquire nuclear weapons.

That was confirmed by his own son in laws, who he had executed.

We also know the Clinton administration signed the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs long before Bush ever took office.

We also know wmds were in fact found in Iraq as reported by the NY Times.

All of this has been proven.

It is actually sort of how the communists here protested the Vietnam War as unrighteous. Well, not sure what was so unrighteous about defending our ally South Vietnam from being run over by communist expansion.

You get that everyone? The commie college protests, with hollywood glorified the commies and attacked big bad America. Highlighted by Hanoi Jane giving aid and comfort to the communists. Like the treasonous cunnt she is.

No, the mass media controls our thoughts and they have been traitorous scumbags for many years now.

The whole Iraq situation is a clear example of that. They shape our thoughts and dictate how to think.

Watch this and see how a scumbag treasonous "news" outlet like CNN does it.


Yes, there is power in words and how things are labeled. The sheep just follow along.
Quick Quiz:

There is one (1) person on the planet with the authority to send American troops to war. Who is it

1. The current Commander in Chief of the United States of America
2. The New York Times
3. Commie college protests
4. The Mass Media
5. Bill Clinton
6. Congress

Go ahead.
.
You think I am going to take the time to answer your bullshit rhetorical question?

What I cannot tell is if you acknowledge the shift in policy from reactive to preemptive after 911 and whether or not you think that was a good policy.

Oh, you have the luxury of saddam being worm shit. Then again you left wing truthers are upset he is dead. Wait, I cannot remember liberals protesting the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs under clinton.


Oooops, was that another one of those things where you all booo the firing of Comey only after Trump fired him, even though you all called for his firing for 6 months?

I get it. A bleeding self admitted hillary voter like yourself, don't hold her to account for voting for the war. Ahhhh, she was lied to by bush even though her husband signed the Iraq Liberation Act for WMDs.

You think I would take the time to answer your fucking question?
Like millions of others, I was saying "please don't do this", while people like you were screaming "USA! USA! USA!"

We were right.

meltonjoshkia.jpg
. As long as there is evil in the world, and people who want us dead, there will be heroic displays like this forever until we are a nation no more. You trying to use this as a political weapon against your American enemies here ??
Six thousand dead, many more maimed and damaged, trillions spent, for nothing.

Blame others all you want. You own this.
.

Ok those of us that cherish 3.6 million children that would have starved to death if Saddam was still in power certainly find the price worth it!
And those of us that know the facts that Iraq is better off financially now then when Saddam was in power PROVE it by showing these FACTS:
Prior to 2003... GDP was $518... 2016 The GDP is $16,500... Now you tell me: is a 3,085% increase over 13 years GOOD or BAD?
Logically it shows tremendous growth...but most idiots don't deal logically MUCH LESS provide ANY source for their wild ass statements!
Iraq GDP per person: MUSINGS ON IRAQ: Life In Iraq Before And After The Invasion Updated
IraqGDP1979-2009.png


Iraq current GDP per person: The World Factbook — Central Intelligence Agency
IraqGDP.png


WHERE ARE YOUR FACTS TO COUNTER THAT IRAQ IS BETTER OFF AND ESPECIALLY SAVING 3.6 MILLION FROM STARVATION WAS NOT WORTH IT???
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
230,244
Reaction score
55,279
Points
2,190
Of course being the ignorant person you would not comprehend that nearly 3.6 million children were saved from starvation.
Again..Read what the experts said about Saddam and his denial of NOT having WMDs.
View attachment 126612

It's not the business of American servicemen and women to die to MAYBE save some starving children.
Besides, we didn't bring any of those kids back to life by invading Iraq.
He doesn't mention that WE were the ones starving them

WE were starving them? How dumb!
Why didn't Saddam simply do what YOU idiots claim was the case. THERE WERE NO WMDS! That's all he had to do!
So why didn't he do it? Why did HE not sign the UN which you always seem to believe what they say is the gospel i.e. (Israel one of the worst civil rights groups)
but in this case you like Saddam didn't care about the starving children.
Geez any compassionate leader would say... you mean all I have to do is LIE about not having WMDs and the sanctions will be lifted? That's it? So why didn't he?
But to BLAME the sanctions is like blaming the law for you driving 40 miles an hour in a 20 mph school zone. "The law was wrong". The sanctions were wrong!
Hmmmm all Saddam had to do was comply as any law abiding person, (obviously not you...) would do... LIE if he had WMDs.
If WE were concerned that our economic sanctions were starving hundreds of thousands of children.......WE could have lifted them

Then it was Bill Clinton's fault...NOT GWB!
On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright (then U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations)
appeared on a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her "We have heard that half a million children have died.
I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"

and Albright replied "we think the price is worth it."
Albright wrote later that Saddam Hussein, not the sanctions, was to blame.
She criticized Stahl's segment as "amount[ing] to Iraqi propaganda"; said that her question was a loaded question;
wrote "I had fallen into a trap and said something I did not mean"; and regretted coming "across as cold-blooded and cruel".
The segment won an Emmy Award.Albright's "non-denial" was taken by sanctions opponents as confirmation of a high number of sanctions related casualties.
‘We Think the Price Is Worth It’

Bill Clinton and Bush 41 kept Saddam in check for 10 YEARS
He was no threat to anyone outside of Iraq

But W just had to have his invasion, he was looking for an excuse from the day he took office. His "Mission Accomplished" still hasn't been accomplished after 14 years
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
230,244
Reaction score
55,279
Points
2,190
Of course being the ignorant person you would not comprehend that nearly 3.6 million children were saved from starvation.
Again..Read what the experts said about Saddam and his denial of NOT having WMDs.
View attachment 126612

It's not the business of American servicemen and women to die to MAYBE save some starving children.
Besides, we didn't bring any of those kids back to life by invading Iraq.
He doesn't mention that WE were the ones starving them

WE were starving them? How dumb!
Why didn't Saddam simply do what YOU idiots claim was the case. THERE WERE NO WMDS! That's all he had to do!
So why didn't he do it? Why did HE not sign the UN which you always seem to believe what they say is the gospel i.e. (Israel one of the worst civil rights groups)
but in this case you like Saddam didn't care about the starving children.
Geez any compassionate leader would say... you mean all I have to do is LIE about not having WMDs and the sanctions will be lifted? That's it? So why didn't he?
But to BLAME the sanctions is like blaming the law for you driving 40 miles an hour in a 20 mph school zone. "The law was wrong". The sanctions were wrong!
Hmmmm all Saddam had to do was comply as any law abiding person, (obviously not you...) would do... LIE if he had WMDs.
If WE were concerned that our economic sanctions were starving hundreds of thousands of children.......WE could have lifted them

And Saddam could have LIED and said there were NO WMDs!
Why are you defending him?

Saddam was honest about his WMDs
It was BUSH who lied to justify a war

If your sanctions are starving 100,000 innocent children....it is time to consider whether your sanctions are worth it
 

beagle9

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 28, 2011
Messages
29,244
Reaction score
7,196
Points
280
This whole thread was to show how words have meanings. And with the MSM using the power of the press by selective changing words,
i.e. under a democrat it was "Liberation of Iraq"... under GOP "Invasion of Iraq".
Under Democrat words of destruction encouragement of our troops.
Under GOP democrats like these encouraged the terrorists!
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "War is lost",
U.S. Rep. Murtha(D) "Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
Senator Kerry(D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"
This Harvard study to have increased violence by 10%...
THE "EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT" asked:
So when those of you that are the mindless robots that take everything the press says as honest,objective, factual you gradually find yourself
becoming less of an American. Less of a person who understands the laws of the land...i.e. you don't shoot cops, you don't burn down businesses.
You become less of an American when you'd rather tear something down then build it up.
You become less of an American who like vicious animals tear at the meat to get a piece rather then work at making the pie bigger!
Fortunately you are becoming the minority.
More and more Americans are finding out the truth without the MSM.
More and more people of the world are finding out that America truly has created what more and more people want.
The freedom to choose where to work. Where to live.
Why else with all the naysayers and people like Obama that apologize for America is that
150 Million Adults Worldwide Would Migrate to the U.S.
WASHINGTON, D.C. -- About 13% of the world's adults -- or more than 640 million people -- say they would like to leave their country permanently. Roughly 150 million of them say they would like to move to the U.S. -- giving it the undisputed title as the world's most desired destination for potential migrants since Gallup started tracking these patterns in 2007.
150 Million Adults Worldwide Would Migrate to the U.S.

If America is as bad as you detractors and Obama AND the MSM make it out to be, why do 150 million adults want to come here?
. Why all the freebies of course.
 
OP
H

healthmyths

Gold Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2011
Messages
23,756
Reaction score
6,348
Points
280
It's not the business of American servicemen and women to die to MAYBE save some starving children.
Besides, we didn't bring any of those kids back to life by invading Iraq.
He doesn't mention that WE were the ones starving them

WE were starving them? How dumb!
Why didn't Saddam simply do what YOU idiots claim was the case. THERE WERE NO WMDS! That's all he had to do!
So why didn't he do it? Why did HE not sign the UN which you always seem to believe what they say is the gospel i.e. (Israel one of the worst civil rights groups)
but in this case you like Saddam didn't care about the starving children.
Geez any compassionate leader would say... you mean all I have to do is LIE about not having WMDs and the sanctions will be lifted? That's it? So why didn't he?
But to BLAME the sanctions is like blaming the law for you driving 40 miles an hour in a 20 mph school zone. "The law was wrong". The sanctions were wrong!
Hmmmm all Saddam had to do was comply as any law abiding person, (obviously not you...) would do... LIE if he had WMDs.
If WE were concerned that our economic sanctions were starving hundreds of thousands of children.......WE could have lifted them

Then it was Bill Clinton's fault...NOT GWB!
On May 12, 1996, Madeleine Albright (then U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations)
appeared on a 60 Minutes segment in which Lesley Stahl asked her "We have heard that half a million children have died.
I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?"

and Albright replied "we think the price is worth it."
Albright wrote later that Saddam Hussein, not the sanctions, was to blame.
She criticized Stahl's segment as "amount[ing] to Iraqi propaganda"; said that her question was a loaded question;
wrote "I had fallen into a trap and said something I did not mean"; and regretted coming "across as cold-blooded and cruel".
The segment won an Emmy Award.Albright's "non-denial" was taken by sanctions opponents as confirmation of a high number of sanctions related casualties.
‘We Think the Price Is Worth It’

Bill Clinton and Bush 41 kept Saddam in check for 10 YEARS
He was no threat to anyone outside of Iraq

But W just had to have his invasion, he was looking for an excuse from the day he took office. His "Mission Accomplished" still hasn't been accomplished after 14 years

Where are your FACTS? Just simple ass wipe opinion on your part! NO proof. Nothing but your dumb ignorant totally manipulated
opinion. at least I don't use MY opinion. I bring to the discussion proof. WHERE IS YOUR PROOF???
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$132.00
Goal
$350.00

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top