Would ANY Bush Basher care to refute these statements???

[AceRothstein]

It was Bush who pulled his troops back in Tora Bora and allowed bin Laden to excape into Pakistan

Made sense actually. Bush realized that killing or capturing bin Laden in 2002 would have caused the American public to consider the war on terror to be over. America wouldn't have bought his invade Iraq rhetoric if bin Laden was dead.
And we know Bush wasn't going to jeopardize his Iraq invasion

So you think if Bush killed bin Laden the war would've been over? Bush did say he was worried more about defeating the terrorists, than concentrating on one man. He had laden on the run. Anyway his intelligence ended up getting laden. Thanks president Bush.

To say you are a partisan hack, a Bush apologist, doesn't even begin to describe how far off the rails you actually are.

I supported the Iraq war, we should've taken Saddam out the first time. I don't agree with everything Bush did. Like listening to liberals on the war. We should've went in did the job and left. Like we used to do. Left a small force to make sure it didn't turn out like it did. When Obama successfully ended it.

When did we do the job and leave? We're still in Germany, Japan and South Korea.

And yes how many wars have been started by Germany since then?

But then again what does the far left know about history...

What kind of insurgency was there in Germany after WWII?

But then again what does the far right now about history...

 

[Kosh]

So you think if Bush killed bin Laden the war would've been over? Bush did say he was worried more about defeating the terrorists, than concentrating on one man. He had laden on the run. Anyway his intelligence ended up getting laden. Thanks president Bush.

To say you are a partisan hack, a Bush apologist, doesn't even begin to describe how far off the rails you actually are.

I supported the Iraq war, we should've taken Saddam out the first time. I don't agree with everything Bush did. Like listening to liberals on the war. We should've went in did the job and left. Like we used to do. Left a small force to make sure it didn't turn out like it did. When Obama successfully ended it.

When did we do the job and leave? We're still in Germany, Japan and South Korea.

And yes how many wars have been started by Germany since then?

But then again what does the far left know about history...

What kind of insurgency was there in Germany after WWII?

But then again what does the far right now about history...

And the far left pushes even more propaganda and continues to show they know nothing about history..

Then again anything that is not far left is automatically far right to them..

 

[NYcarbineer]

I isn't a lie. I is an accepted fact of history. It became facts of history when years after the invasion and occupation of Iraq, claims that were made were proven to be false. Bush claimed in his State of the Union Address following 9/11 that Iraq was aiding and protecting al Qaeda. That has proven beyond any doubt to have been a lie. He might not have connected Saddam to 9/11, but he claimed Saddam was in collusion with the terrorist group that was.

The main reason we went to war was because Saddam refused to comply with un resolutions. Bush gave Saddam plenty of time to comply. Saddam lied, so he died.

That did not make war necessary.

So you like to draw imaginary red lines and do nothing when they are crossed? Another reason we are the laughing stock of the world under Obama.

1. I don't want Americans dying in unnecessary wars. You do realize Americans died in Iraq, right? You talk as if you don't.

2. North Korea has been violating ceasefire agreements since the '50's.

YOU do realize that a Harvard study showed that when encouraging words like these were used the terrorists were (their words not mine!!) "emboldened"!
The Harvard Study asked: THE EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT
"Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?
The resounding answer WAS YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.
Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public statements critical of the war.
In Iraqi provinces that were broadly comparable in social and economic terms, attacks increased between 7 percent and 10 percent following what the researchers call "high-mention weeks," like the two just before the November 2006 election.
And these statements which idiots like YOU most likely agreed with did everything in the world to encourage recruit and reward the terrorists to continue.

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
NOTE: You are not that naive to think the terrorists didn't find Kerry calling OUR TROOPS terrorists absolutely EMBOLDENING???

Remember Kerry EARLIER wanted Bush to: "Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ....
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

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
NOTE: Do you not believe the terrorists LOVED to hear our troops were cold blooded killers???

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

then Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

You can't convince me that the TERRORISTS were emboldened and encouraged and recruited more terrorists!
After all you idiots that bring up Abu Ghraib as a prime motivator for terrorists recruitment... HOW MUCH more with idiots like the above making those
terrible disgusting statements calling our troops "civilian killers"... "terrorists"!

You want to force people to support a war they believe was wrong?

We never should have been in Iraq in the first place. EVERYTHING after that is wrong.

 

[healthmyths]

The main reason we went to war was because Saddam refused to comply with un resolutions. Bush gave Saddam plenty of time to comply. Saddam lied, so he died.

That did not make war necessary.

So you like to draw imaginary red lines and do nothing when they are crossed? Another reason we are the laughing stock of the world under Obama.

1. I don't want Americans dying in unnecessary wars. You do realize Americans died in Iraq, right? You talk as if you don't.

2. North Korea has been violating ceasefire agreements since the '50's.

Yes I know, liberals counted their deaths daily until Obama was elected. They also died in vain in iraq, because of Obama.

Ah, so now you admit the war was unnecessary. Now you admit they died in vain.

Case closed. I've gotten you to concede I was right, and you were wrong.

Actually more then 4,000 troops DIED because of idiots like you and these idiots as proven by this Harvard study!

YOU do realize that a Harvard study showed that when encouraging words like these were used the terrorists were (their words not mine!!) "emboldened"!
The Harvard Study asked: THE EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT
"Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?
The resounding answer WAS YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.
Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public statements critical of the war.
In Iraqi provinces that were broadly comparable in social and economic terms, attacks increased between 7 percent and 10 percent following what the researchers call "high-mention weeks," like the two just before the November 2006 election.
And these statements which idiots like YOU most likely agreed with did everything in the world to encourage recruit and reward the terrorists to continue.

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
NOTE: You are not that naive to think the terrorists didn't find Kerry calling OUR TROOPS terrorists absolutely EMBOLDENING???

Remember Kerry EARLIER wanted Bush to: "Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ....
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

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
NOTE: Do you not believe the terrorists LOVED to hear our troops were cold blooded killers???

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

then Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

You can't convince me that the TERRORISTS were emboldened and encouraged and recruited more terrorists!
After all you idiots that bring up Abu Ghraib as a prime motivator for terrorists recruitment... HOW MUCH more with idiots like the above making those
terrible disgusting statements calling our troops "civilian killers"... "terrorists"!

YOU disgusting traitors like the above LOVED the deaths and every day rushed to see the MSM report the deaths!
All you wanted was political gain at the expense of American deaths!
YOU tell me though if everyone of those deaths were to understand how you guys ENCOURAGED the terrorists do you think they would be happy
to be known as "Terrorists" Civilian Killers, Cold blooded killers?
Words have meanings especially when like cheerleaders standing on the sidelines CHEERING for the other team! Which is what you idiots did!

 

[Lakhota]

Not only did Bush 43 lie us into Iraq - his daddy, Bush 41 lied us into the First Gulf War by suckering Saddam into invading Kuwait. The Bushes cost America much prestige, blood and treasure.

Bush 41 suckered Saddam into invading Kuwait by giving him the "green light" via April Glaspie.

It is now more than fifteen years since that fateful meeting on July 25, 1990 between then-US Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie and President Saddam Hussein that the Iraqi leader interpreted as a green light from Washington for his invasion of Kuwait eight days later.

TRANSCRIPT: Is the US State Department still keeping April Glaspie under wraps?​

Bush 43 conjured up lies to invade Iraq a 2nd time. He was planning to invade Iraq before 9/11.

The Downing Street Memo :: What is it?​

 

[rightwinger]

Not only did Bush 43 lie us into Iraq - his daddy, Bush 41 lied us into the First Gulf War by suckering Saddam into invading Kuwait. The Bushes cost America much prestige, blood and treasure.

Bush 41 suckered Saddam into invading Kuwait by giving him the "green light" via April Glaspie.

It is now more than fifteen years since that fateful meeting on July 25, 1990 between then-US Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie and President Saddam Hussein that the Iraqi leader interpreted as a green light from Washington for his invasion of Kuwait eight days later.

TRANSCRIPT: Is the US State Department still keeping April Glaspie under wraps?​

Bush 43 conjured up lies to invade Iraq a 2nd time. He was planning to invade Iraq before 9/11.

The Downing Street Memo :: What is it?​

Is there any question what Jeb would do?

Iraq War III

 

[Camp]

So you think if Bush killed bin Laden the war would've been over? Bush did say he was worried more about defeating the terrorists, than concentrating on one man. He had laden on the run. Anyway his intelligence ended up getting laden. Thanks president Bush.

To say you are a partisan hack, a Bush apologist, doesn't even begin to describe how far off the rails you actually are.

I supported the Iraq war, we should've taken Saddam out the first time. I don't agree with everything Bush did. Like listening to liberals on the war. We should've went in did the job and left. Like we used to do. Left a small force to make sure it didn't turn out like it did. When Obama successfully ended it.

When did we do the job and leave? We're still in Germany, Japan and South Korea.

And yes how many wars have been started by Germany since then?

But then again what does the far left know about history...

What kind of insurgency was there in Germany after WWII?

But then again what does the far right now about history...

It was a big a significant one, but it was about the importation of hops and ingredients for beer and was settle peacefully.

 

[Kosh]

The main reason we went to war was because Saddam refused to comply with un resolutions. Bush gave Saddam plenty of time to comply. Saddam lied, so he died.

That did not make war necessary.

So you like to draw imaginary red lines and do nothing when they are crossed? Another reason we are the laughing stock of the world under Obama.

1. I don't want Americans dying in unnecessary wars. You do realize Americans died in Iraq, right? You talk as if you don't.

2. North Korea has been violating ceasefire agreements since the '50's.

YOU do realize that a Harvard study showed that when encouraging words like these were used the terrorists were (their words not mine!!) "emboldened"!
The Harvard Study asked: THE EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT
"Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?
The resounding answer WAS YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.
Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public statements critical of the war.
In Iraqi provinces that were broadly comparable in social and economic terms, attacks increased between 7 percent and 10 percent following what the researchers call "high-mention weeks," like the two just before the November 2006 election.
And these statements which idiots like YOU most likely agreed with did everything in the world to encourage recruit and reward the terrorists to continue.

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
NOTE: You are not that naive to think the terrorists didn't find Kerry calling OUR TROOPS terrorists absolutely EMBOLDENING???

Remember Kerry EARLIER wanted Bush to: "Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ....
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

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
NOTE: Do you not believe the terrorists LOVED to hear our troops were cold blooded killers???

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

then Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

You can't convince me that the TERRORISTS were emboldened and encouraged and recruited more terrorists!
After all you idiots that bring up Abu Ghraib as a prime motivator for terrorists recruitment... HOW MUCH more with idiots like the above making those
terrible disgusting statements calling our troops "civilian killers"... "terrorists"!

You want to force people to support a war they believe was wrong?

We never should have been in Iraq in the first place. EVERYTHING after that is wrong.

Says the far left drone that supports Obama's illegal wars..

 

[Kosh]

That did not make war necessary.

So you like to draw imaginary red lines and do nothing when they are crossed? Another reason we are the laughing stock of the world under Obama.

1. I don't want Americans dying in unnecessary wars. You do realize Americans died in Iraq, right? You talk as if you don't.

2. North Korea has been violating ceasefire agreements since the '50's.

Yes I know, liberals counted their deaths daily until Obama was elected. They also died in vain in iraq, because of Obama.

Ah, so now you admit the war was unnecessary. Now you admit they died in vain.

Case closed. I've gotten you to concede I was right, and you were wrong.

Actually more then 4,000 troops DIED because of idiots like you and these idiots as proven by this Harvard study!

YOU do realize that a Harvard study showed that when encouraging words like these were used the terrorists were (their words not mine!!) "emboldened"!
The Harvard Study asked: THE EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT
"Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?
The resounding answer WAS YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.
Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public statements critical of the war.
In Iraqi provinces that were broadly comparable in social and economic terms, attacks increased between 7 percent and 10 percent following what the researchers call "high-mention weeks," like the two just before the November 2006 election.
And these statements which idiots like YOU most likely agreed with did everything in the world to encourage recruit and reward the terrorists to continue.

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
NOTE: You are not that naive to think the terrorists didn't find Kerry calling OUR TROOPS terrorists absolutely EMBOLDENING???

Remember Kerry EARLIER wanted Bush to: "Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ....
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

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
NOTE: Do you not believe the terrorists LOVED to hear our troops were cold blooded killers???

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

then Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

You can't convince me that the TERRORISTS were emboldened and encouraged and recruited more terrorists!
After all you idiots that bring up Abu Ghraib as a prime motivator for terrorists recruitment... HOW MUCH more with idiots like the above making those
terrible disgusting statements calling our troops "civilian killers"... "terrorists"!

YOU disgusting traitors like the above LOVED the deaths and every day rushed to see the MSM report the deaths!
All you wanted was political gain at the expense of American deaths!
YOU tell me though if everyone of those deaths were to understand how you guys ENCOURAGED the terrorists do you think they would be happy
to be known as "Terrorists" Civilian Killers, Cold blooded killers?
Words have meanings especially when like cheerleaders standing on the sidelines CHEERING for the other team! Which is what you idiots did!

Proof that the far left freedom speech kills...

 

[healthmyths]

The main reason we went to war was because Saddam refused to comply with un resolutions. Bush gave Saddam plenty of time to comply. Saddam lied, so he died.

That did not make war necessary.

So you like to draw imaginary red lines and do nothing when they are crossed? Another reason we are the laughing stock of the world under Obama.

1. I don't want Americans dying in unnecessary wars. You do realize Americans died in Iraq, right? You talk as if you don't.

2. North Korea has been violating ceasefire agreements since the '50's.

YOU do realize that a Harvard study showed that when encouraging words like these were used the terrorists were (their words not mine!!) "emboldened"!
The Harvard Study asked: THE EMBOLDENMENT EFFECT
"Are insurgents in Iraq emboldened by voices in the news media expressing dissent or calling for troop withdrawals from Iraq?
The resounding answer WAS YES!!! according to Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university's Kennedy School of Government.
Using data on attacks and variation in access to international news across Iraqi provinces, we identify an “emboldenment” effect by comparing the rate of insurgent attacks in areas with higher and lower access to information about U.S news after public statements critical of the war.
In Iraqi provinces that were broadly comparable in social and economic terms, attacks increased between 7 percent and 10 percent following what the researchers call "high-mention weeks," like the two just before the November 2006 election.
And these statements which idiots like YOU most likely agreed with did everything in the world to encourage recruit and reward the terrorists to continue.

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
NOTE: You are not that naive to think the terrorists didn't find Kerry calling OUR TROOPS terrorists absolutely EMBOLDENING???

Remember Kerry EARLIER wanted Bush to: "Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ....
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

U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”
NOTE: Do you not believe the terrorists LOVED to hear our troops were cold blooded killers???

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

then Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

You can't convince me that the TERRORISTS were emboldened and encouraged and recruited more terrorists!
After all you idiots that bring up Abu Ghraib as a prime motivator for terrorists recruitment... HOW MUCH more with idiots like the above making those
terrible disgusting statements calling our troops "civilian killers"... "terrorists"!

You want to force people to support a war they believe was wrong?

We never should have been in Iraq in the first place. EVERYTHING after that is wrong.

Well from the Iraqis perspective as reported below... THEY were happy we were there!
"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 - The Atlantic

ONLY people like you that wanted to see these people continue to suffer under Saddam, that wanted 2.6 million kids to starve.
Hey just a quick thought... if you were responsible for 28 million people and the UN sanctions that prevented food from reaching your people
i.e. starving 100,000 kids a year.. and ALL YOU NEEDED to do was CONFIRM, I.E. CERTIFY there were NO WMDs! Wouldn't you do it???
The sanctions against Iraq were a near-total financial and trade embargo imposed by the United Nations Security Council on the nation of Iraq.
They began August 6, 1990, four days after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, stayed largely in force until May 2003 (after Saddam Hussein's being forced from power),...
Estimates of excess deaths of children during the sanctions range from 100,000 to over 500,000.
Sanctions against Iraq - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia
This is an average of almost 40,000 children a year which if the Liberation had not happened, as of today Saddam's refusal to obey the sanctions
would have starved nearly 2.6 million children !
If Iraq hadn't been liberated in less then 6 weeks, 28 million would still be captive and 2.6 million kids starved!

 

[Kosh]

Not only did Bush 43 lie us into Iraq - his daddy, Bush 41 lied us into the First Gulf War by suckering Saddam into invading Kuwait. The Bushes cost America much prestige, blood and treasure.

Bush 41 suckered Saddam into invading Kuwait by giving him the "green light" via April Glaspie.

It is now more than fifteen years since that fateful meeting on July 25, 1990 between then-US Ambassador to Iraq April Glaspie and President Saddam Hussein that the Iraqi leader interpreted as a green light from Washington for his invasion of Kuwait eight days later.

TRANSCRIPT: Is the US State Department still keeping April Glaspie under wraps?​

Bush 43 conjured up lies to invade Iraq a 2nd time. He was planning to invade Iraq before 9/11.

The Downing Street Memo :: What is it?​

And the far left shows that they will go to any far left blog site to up hold their religious propaganda.

Can you imagine how different things would be if the far left was just as silent like they are now? Anti war good up to 2009..

 

[rdean]

I seem to remember Republicans claiming that Clintons warnings about bin Laden were just attempts by Clinton to distract the country from its Blow Job Trial. Remember "wag the dog"?

I guess you're right, he got the blow job out of the papers, but didn't bother to get laden. When he had the chance. The reason, because liberals would've hated laden to be killed. To a liberal anything good for the country is bad. Another reason not to elect a president that makes his decisions on polls.

It was Bush who pulled his troops back in Tora Bora and allowed bin Laden to excape into Pakistan

Made sense actually. Bush realized that killing or capturing bin Laden in 2002 would have caused the American public to consider the war on terror to be over. America wouldn't have bought his invade Iraq rhetoric if bin Laden was dead.
And we know Bush wasn't going to jeopardize his Iraq invasion

So you think if Bush killed bin Laden the war would've been over? Bush did say he was worried more about defeating the terrorists, than concentrating on one man. He had laden on the run. Anyway his intelligence ended up getting laden. Thanks president Bush.

No

I believe that if Bush had killed bin Laden in 2002 like he could have, he never would have gotten his war in Iraq

That is why he was so unenthusiastic about getting bin Laden

So killing bin laden would've made Saddam obey the un sanctions?

Saddam never was building nuclear weapons. His country was suffering from the crippling sanctions. Bush simply made shit up. Like Republicans with Obama. Benghazi, Fast and Furious, and so on. Just made up shit.

 

[jasonnfree]

Another thread trying to cleanse a lying p.o.s. prez. An unelected one at that . The statements bush made about going into iraq even prior to 9-11 would be enough to convict an ordinary citizen. Vince Bugliosi wrote a book about how he would prosecute bush jr. It doesn't appear that conservatives read though. They must just believe the crap dished out to them by right wing media.

 

[TooTall]

They invaded because of WMDs. No wait, it was oil. Um...it was UN sanctions. When you decide the reason they invaded, let me know...

OIL...says who?

Are you paying attention??? The plans to invade Iraq were already being discussed 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before Sept. 11.

What we NOW know from G.W. Bush's first Treasury Secretary, the invasion of Iraq was discussed 10 days into the administration.

Bush Sought 'Way' To Invade Iraq

Going after Saddam was topic "A" 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before Sept. 11.

"From the very first instance, it was about Iraq. It was about what we can do to change this regime," says Suskind. "Day one, these things were laid and sealed."

As treasury secretary, O'Neill was a permanent member of the National Security Council. He says in the book he was surprised at the meeting that questions such as "Why Saddam?" and "Why now?" were never asked.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying 'Go find me a way to do this,'" says O'Neill. "For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the U.S. has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do, is a really huge leap."

And that came up at this first meeting, says O'Neill, who adds that the discussion of Iraq continued at the next National Security Council meeting two days later.

He got briefing materials under this cover sheet. "There are memos. One of them marked, secret, says, 'Plan for post-Saddam Iraq,'" adds Suskind, who says that they discussed an occupation of Iraq in January and February of 2001. Based on his interviews with O'Neill and several other officials at the meetings, Suskind writes that the planning envisioned peacekeeping troops, war crimes tribunals, and even divvying up Iraq's oil wealth.

He obtained one Pentagon document, dated March 5, 2001, and entitled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield contracts," which includes a map of potential areas for exploration.

"It talks about contractors around the world from, you know, 30-40 countries. And which ones have what intentions," says Suskind. "On oil in Iraq."

During the campaign, candidate Bush had criticized the Clinton-Gore Administration for being too interventionist: "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road. And I'm going to prevent that."

"The thing that's most surprising, I think, is how emphatically, from the very first, the administration had said 'X' during the campaign, but from the first day was often doing 'Y,'" says Suskind. "Not just saying 'Y,' but actively moving toward the opposite of what they had said during the election."

Bush Sought 'Way' To Invade Iraq - CBS News

How utterly ignorant you are about what goes on at the Pentagon. I could find at least one document detailing the invasion and occupation of Canada and/or Mexico. That is what they do. Plan for contingencies that they hope they will never have to implement.

AND how f...king ignorant both YOU and the Pentagon are by using the term "INVASION"!
Why did you excuse Clinton for calling it the "Liberation of Iraq" then?
The use of the word is a negative...even Invasion of Mexico! YOU don't seem to comprehend how words have MEANINGS and I would not be
favorable to the Invasion of America by ISIS!

I don't tell the Pentagon what words to use in their contingency plans.

What an ignorant comment! Did I say you even had the intelligence to say something let alone TELL the Pentagon? How f...king dumb are you?
But obviously you don't read very well which means you are to be pitied or your are dumb![/QUOTE]

I am not sorry that the Pentagon used the word invasion, but I will not quote all of those ignorant bastards that know nothing about keeping the US safe if that will make you happy. I had no idea you knew more than they did about contingency planning and what to plan for and what not to plan for.

 

[Lakhota]

How does one rationalize the fact that Bush 43 planned to invade Iraq before 9/11?

The Downing Street Memo: What is it?

 

[kaz]

How does one rationalize the fact that Bush 43 planned to invade Iraq before 9/11?

The Downing Street Memo: What is it?

I don't get the point of this. You thought on 9/11 he suddenly decided Hussein was a threat? He thought that before 9/11, and that tells us what exactly? BTW, the Clinton Iraq policy was "regime change." Maybe it wasn't just W...

This is still you petty Partisans driving down the same road and fighting over who gets to sit behind the steering wheel. We need a better middle east policy, not an aha, I got you opportunity.

 

[Lakhota]

How does one rationalize the fact that Bush 43 planned to invade Iraq before 9/11?

The Downing Street Memo: What is it?

I don't get the point of this. You thought on 9/11 he suddenly decided Hussein was a threat? He thought that before 9/11, and that tells us what exactly? BTW, the Clinton Iraq policy was "regime change." Maybe it wasn't just W...

This is still you petty Partisans driving down the same road and fighting over who gets to sit behind the steering wheel. We need a better middle east policy, not an aha, I got you opportunity.

Actually, what we need is factual and truthful history!

 

[NoTeaPartyPleez]

A) Did these DEMOCRATS make these statements MANY before Bush was President? YES or NO!
Democrat Quotes on WMD
"..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 ignored the mandate of the UN and is building WMDs and the means to deliver.." Levin 2002
"Saddam has been engaged in development of WMDs which is a threat.."Pelosi 1998
"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building WMDS.."Albright 1999
"Saddam to refine delivery systems, that will threaten the US..."Graham 2001
"Compelling evidence Saddam has WMDs production storage capacity.." Graham 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..threat our security"..Kerry 2002
"Without a question, we need to disarm Saddam. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an
oppressive regime .... 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
"..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
“So it is with conviction that I support this resolution as being in the best interest of our nation.
A vote for it is not a vote to rush to war. It is a vote that puts awesome responsibility in the hands
of our president.”
Hillary Clinton on October 2, 2002

Clinton signed this ACT and proceeded to bomb Iraq!
Saddam continued to defy UN, USA the rest of the world.

The 1998 Liberation of Iraq, SIGNED by CLINTON, and the Congress passed Resolution of 2002 (Public law 107-243, 116 Stat. 1497-1502)
"Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq " "Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling .
"It should be the policy of the United States to support efforts to remove the regime headed by Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq and to promote the emergence of a democratic government to replace that regime."
On December 16, 1998, President Bill Clinton mandated Operation Desert Fox, a major four-day bombing campaign on Iraqi targets.

So with the backdrop of 9/11 and the murder of 3,000 people of the worst attack on American soil EVER..
given all the issues with Saddam PLUS many of you forget the tremendous anxiety of the Anthrax attacks that seven days after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, anonymous letters laced with deadly anthrax spores began arriving at media companies and congressional offices. Over the ensuing months, five people died from inhaling anthrax and 17 others were infected after exposure.Feb 15, 2011
NO ONE KNEW where these came from BUT we did KNOW Saddam had the following bioweapons:
Of these, three — anthrax, botulinum and aflatoxin— had proceeded to weaponization for deployment.
Iraqi biological weapons program - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

All of you great minds with the benefit of HINDSIGHT... YOU tell me if you were President and the above
DEMOCRATS were pushing you to remove Saddam because proof of Saddam's ability to delivery and therefore use WMDs was irrefutable!
YOU tell me what you would have done!!

The Cost of Ignoring UN Inspectors: An Unnecessary War with Iraq
"
The IAEA’s Director General, Mohamed ElBaradei, and UNMOVIC’s Executive Chairman, Hans Blix, both reported progress, following the return of UN inspectors to Iraq in November 2002, in resolving critical questions about the current status of Iraq’s WMD programs.

Based on more than a hundred visits to suspect sites and private interviews with a number of individual scientists known to have been involved with WMD programs in the past, ElBaradei stated that the IAEA had “to date found no evidence or plausible indication of the revival of a nuclear weapons programme in Iraq....”

The Cost of Ignoring UN Inspectors An Unnecessary War with Iraq

 

[rightwinger]

How does one rationalize the fact that Bush 43 planned to invade Iraq before 9/11?

The Downing Street Memo: What is it?

I don't get the point of this. You thought on 9/11 he suddenly decided Hussein was a threat? He thought that before 9/11, and that tells us what exactly? BTW, the Clinton Iraq policy was "regime change." Maybe it wasn't just W...

This is still you petty Partisans driving down the same road and fighting over who gets to sit behind the steering wheel. We need a better middle east policy, not an aha, I got you opportunity.

After 9-11, one of Bush's first priorities was to find a way to pin it on Saddam Hussein

 

[Camp]

How does one rationalize the fact that Bush 43 planned to invade Iraq before 9/11?

The Downing Street Memo: What is it?

I don't get the point of this. You thought on 9/11 he suddenly decided Hussein was a threat? He thought that before 9/11, and that tells us what exactly? BTW, the Clinton Iraq policy was "regime change." Maybe it wasn't just W...

This is still you petty Partisans driving down the same road and fighting over who gets to sit behind the steering wheel. We need a better middle east policy, not an aha, I got you opportunity.

After 9-11, one of Bush's first priorities was to find a way to pin it on Saddam Hussein

I still can't get an answer to a basic question. What did Bush mean when he said Iraq was giving aid and protection to al Qaeda. He said it in his State of the Union Address immediately following 9/11. Why hasn't any evidence ever been presented that this was a true statement? Why is it wrong to call his statement a lie?