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

[kaz]

Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war

How many did the Democrats make?

 

[TooTall]

Great thread. Lots of Democratic POLITICIANS caved into a feverish call for military action on the part of a very loud and very frightened electorate. Those chicken shit POLITICIANS listened to what Americans....who had been frightened by FOX NEWS and the BUSH ADMIN told them was needed.

I cheered when George stood on that pile of debris and promised justice. I was with that asshole 100%. He fucked up. Period.

They also listened to what the US and allied Intel agencies said, and when the UN agreed Iraq was in material breach of the cease fire, it was a done deal. It's not like Bush didn't give Saddam ample opportunity to come clean, because he did.

Sure. The American electorate got the info straight from the intel agencies. No filter. Sure.

And...the UN was right there in support of our invasion. Absolutely.

Try harder.

The appropriate US Congress critters got the info straight from the intel agencies and voted on that info. The UN affirmed that Iraq was in material breach of the cease fire. Try harder.

Oh! A history lesson!! Thanks!

You have been duped.

Just the facts bedwetter.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war

How many did the Democrats make?

The Democrats voted against the war.

 

[rightwinger]

Great thread. Lots of Democratic POLITICIANS caved into a feverish call for military action on the part of a very loud and very frightened electorate. Those chicken shit POLITICIANS listened to what Americans....who had been frightened by FOX NEWS and the BUSH ADMIN told them was needed.

I cheered when George stood on that pile of debris and promised justice. I was with that asshole 100%. He fucked up. Period.

They also listened to what the US and allied Intel agencies said, and when the UN agreed Iraq was in material breach of the cease fire, it was a done deal. It's not like Bush didn't give Saddam ample opportunity to come clean, because he did.

Sure. The American electorate got the info straight from the intel agencies. No filter. Sure.

And...the UN was right there in support of our invasion. Absolutely.

Try harder.

The appropriate US Congress critters got the info straight from the intel agencies and voted on that info. The UN affirmed that Iraq was in material breach of the cease fire. Try harder.

Oh! A history lesson!! Thanks!

You have been duped.

The big lie of Iraq was the Democrats saying they were lied to. Iraq was a bad idea regardless of WMDs. But Democrats were all over it, then pointed fingers for their own actions.

You have been duped

More Democrats voted against the war than for it. The Republican vote was nearly unanimous

But the decision to invade came from Bush

 

[rightwinger]

Bush and Bush alone ordered the invasion. At the time, the UN was asking for more time to prove there were no WMDs
Bush attacked before his phony WMDS story could fall apart

The UN SANCTIONS put in place by the UN simply asked Saddam "please certify you don't have WMDs" continued while Saddam let 576,000 children starve!
In five years 576,000 children starved BECAUSE SADDAM refused to certify WMD destruction!
The sanctions were imposed by the Security Council after Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990. Led by the United States, the Council has rejected many Iraqi appeals to lift the restrictions, which have crippled the economy, until Iraq accounts for all its weapons of mass destruction and United Nations inspectors can certify that they have been destroyed in accordance with several Council resolutions.
Iraq Sanctions Kill Children U.N. Reports - NYTimes.com

NOW you idiots tell me IF Saddam refused to CERTIFY and he obviously didn't care about the starving kids... would you believe he HAD WMDs?
Would you believe his son in law?
A) Saddam was not ready to say he had NO WMDs and willing to let 576,000 kids starve.
B) Saddam WAS proven by the Democrats to having used WMDs on his own people.
C) Saddam was proven to pay $25,000 for suicide terrorists.
D) Ask Saddam's son-in-law...oh wait you can't Saddam killed him when he went back to Iraq... good guy your buddy Saddam!
E) And of course you probably don't agree after 9/11 there was NO need to think Saddam was involved right?
F) Were you aware 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. And of course you knew that your buddy Saddam HAD nothing to do with it...even Saddam Hussein's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth.
It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs.
And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production.

Oddly, Republicans claimed to invade because of UN sanctions

Yet, when that same UN asked them to hold off the invasion until more evidence came in........they ignored them

 

[TooTall]

Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war

How many did the Democrats make?

The Democrats voted against the war.

The ones that were briefed in Committee and knew what was going on voted for the war. Clinton and Kerry come to mind.

 

[kaz]

They also listened to what the US and allied Intel agencies said, and when the UN agreed Iraq was in material breach of the cease fire, it was a done deal. It's not like Bush didn't give Saddam ample opportunity to come clean, because he did.

Sure. The American electorate got the info straight from the intel agencies. No filter. Sure.

And...the UN was right there in support of our invasion. Absolutely.

Try harder.

The appropriate US Congress critters got the info straight from the intel agencies and voted on that info. The UN affirmed that Iraq was in material breach of the cease fire. Try harder.

Oh! A history lesson!! Thanks!

You have been duped.

The big lie of Iraq was the Democrats saying they were lied to. Iraq was a bad idea regardless of WMDs. But Democrats were all over it, then pointed fingers for their own actions.

You have been duped

More Democrats voted against the war than for it. The Republican vote was nearly unanimous

But the decision to invade came from Bush

1) Enough Democrats voted for it to pass it, had they needed more, more would have voted for it. It's a typical ploy used by both parties to have it both ways.

2) The Democrats who voted against said the same things about Hussein, they told the same lies. They just said things like they want more time. They did not say we need a better policy.

3) Democrats also while claiming blood for oil continued to block expanding exploration at home while continuing to whine and blast W for oil prices.

Yeah, a party of integrity you are...

 

[kaz]

Bush and Bush alone ordered the invasion. At the time, the UN was asking for more time to prove there were no WMDs
Bush attacked before his phony WMDS story could fall apart

The UN SANCTIONS put in place by the UN simply asked Saddam "please certify you don't have WMDs" continued while Saddam let 576,000 children starve!
In five years 576,000 children starved BECAUSE SADDAM refused to certify WMD destruction!
The sanctions were imposed by the Security Council after Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990. Led by the United States, the Council has rejected many Iraqi appeals to lift the restrictions, which have crippled the economy, until Iraq accounts for all its weapons of mass destruction and United Nations inspectors can certify that they have been destroyed in accordance with several Council resolutions.
Iraq Sanctions Kill Children U.N. Reports - NYTimes.com

NOW you idiots tell me IF Saddam refused to CERTIFY and he obviously didn't care about the starving kids... would you believe he HAD WMDs?
Would you believe his son in law?
A) Saddam was not ready to say he had NO WMDs and willing to let 576,000 kids starve.
B) Saddam WAS proven by the Democrats to having used WMDs on his own people.
C) Saddam was proven to pay $25,000 for suicide terrorists.
D) Ask Saddam's son-in-law...oh wait you can't Saddam killed him when he went back to Iraq... good guy your buddy Saddam!
E) And of course you probably don't agree after 9/11 there was NO need to think Saddam was involved right?
F) Were you aware 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. And of course you knew that your buddy Saddam HAD nothing to do with it...even Saddam Hussein's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth.
It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs.
And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production.

Oddly, Republicans claimed to invade because of UN sanctions

Yet, when that same UN asked them to hold off the invasion until more evidence came in........they ignored them

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...

 

[zeke]

More Democrats voted against the war than for it. The Republican vote was nearly unanimous

But the decision to invade came from Bush

Ever notice how Republicans just can't get far enough away from their decisions?
The Republicans ALWAYS have someone or something that they have to blame for THEIR failures.
Republicans NEVER have success to point to with pride and accomplishment.
Republicans NEVER take responsibility for their actions.

Why is that? Why would ANYONE vote for such an incompetent, irresponsible group of politicians as Republicans?

Or ever believe what a Republican has to say about anything?

And why can't we attract a smarter group of Republican on this message board? Or is what we have represent the best the Republicans have to offer in the way of ordinary citizens?

If so, the Republican party is in real trouble.

 

[rightwinger]

Bush and Bush alone ordered the invasion. At the time, the UN was asking for more time to prove there were no WMDs
Bush attacked before his phony WMDS story could fall apart

The UN SANCTIONS put in place by the UN simply asked Saddam "please certify you don't have WMDs" continued while Saddam let 576,000 children starve!
In five years 576,000 children starved BECAUSE SADDAM refused to certify WMD destruction!
The sanctions were imposed by the Security Council after Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990. Led by the United States, the Council has rejected many Iraqi appeals to lift the restrictions, which have crippled the economy, until Iraq accounts for all its weapons of mass destruction and United Nations inspectors can certify that they have been destroyed in accordance with several Council resolutions.
Iraq Sanctions Kill Children U.N. Reports - NYTimes.com

NOW you idiots tell me IF Saddam refused to CERTIFY and he obviously didn't care about the starving kids... would you believe he HAD WMDs?
Would you believe his son in law?
A) Saddam was not ready to say he had NO WMDs and willing to let 576,000 kids starve.
B) Saddam WAS proven by the Democrats to having used WMDs on his own people.
C) Saddam was proven to pay $25,000 for suicide terrorists.
D) Ask Saddam's son-in-law...oh wait you can't Saddam killed him when he went back to Iraq... good guy your buddy Saddam!
E) And of course you probably don't agree after 9/11 there was NO need to think Saddam was involved right?
F) Were you aware 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. And of course you knew that your buddy Saddam HAD nothing to do with it...even Saddam Hussein's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth.
It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs.
And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production.

Oddly, Republicans claimed to invade because of UN sanctions

Yet, when that same UN asked them to hold off the invasion until more evidence came in........they ignored them

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...

They invaded because Bush was looking for any excuse to invade

 

[AvgGuyIA]

What about this statement?

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

Barack Obama October 2 2002

This is why that asshole refuses to call it
Islamic Extremism. He's a Muslim and refuses to fight against those radical Imams.

 

[healthmyths]

Bush and Bush alone ordered the invasion. At the time, the UN was asking for more time to prove there were no WMDs
Bush attacked before his phony WMDS story could fall apart

The UN SANCTIONS put in place by the UN simply asked Saddam "please certify you don't have WMDs" continued while Saddam let 576,000 children starve!
In five years 576,000 children starved BECAUSE SADDAM refused to certify WMD destruction!
The sanctions were imposed by the Security Council after Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990. Led by the United States, the Council has rejected many Iraqi appeals to lift the restrictions, which have crippled the economy, until Iraq accounts for all its weapons of mass destruction and United Nations inspectors can certify that they have been destroyed in accordance with several Council resolutions.
Iraq Sanctions Kill Children U.N. Reports - NYTimes.com

NOW you idiots tell me IF Saddam refused to CERTIFY and he obviously didn't care about the starving kids... would you believe he HAD WMDs?
Would you believe his son in law?
A) Saddam was not ready to say he had NO WMDs and willing to let 576,000 kids starve.
B) Saddam WAS proven by the Democrats to having used WMDs on his own people.
C) Saddam was proven to pay $25,000 for suicide terrorists.
D) Ask Saddam's son-in-law...oh wait you can't Saddam killed him when he went back to Iraq... good guy your buddy Saddam!
E) And of course you probably don't agree after 9/11 there was NO need to think Saddam was involved right?
F) Were you aware 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. And of course you knew that your buddy Saddam HAD nothing to do with it...even Saddam Hussein's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth.
It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs.
And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production.

Oddly, Republicans claimed to invade because of UN sanctions

Yet, when that same UN asked them to hold off the invasion until more evidence came in........they ignored them

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...

There were 28 million reasons and Clinton used the right term "LIBERATION of Iraq"...
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.

SULAYMANIYAH, Northern Iraq – The bald eagle, Old Glory and the almighty dollar are king in this portion of Iraq, where ethnic Kurds don’t hide their affection for the U.S. Shops peddle American flags, U.S. military gear is prized and the locals speak glowingly of the nation they credit with removing Saddam Hussein, the dictator whose heavy hand so often came down on the minority clustered in Iraq’s northern regions.
"Imagine if America didn't exist,” said Kurdo Amin Agha, an accountant whose home is adorned with Israeli, American and Kurdistan flags, and who wears a U.S. Army shirt and Navy SEAL watch. “Without America, the world would be run by China or Iran.
"America represents freedom," he added. "Our dream is to be eternally allied to America."
The roots of the Kurdish affection for America lie in the U.S.-led operations Desert Shield and Desert Storm. While the first, under President George H.W. Bush, did not topple the hated Hussein, it served notice that America was his enemy.

U.S. military forces ousted Hussein in 2003 and brought him to ultimate justice in 2006, when he was executed on orders of an Iraqi tribunal. Tens of thousands of Kurds were murdered, many with chemical weapons, on orders of the former Baath Party leader. Once Hussein was gone, the oil-rich Kurdish region began to prosper.
Love American Style Iraq s Kurds fans of all things US Bush Fox News

Heard any of the above comments in ABC,CBS,NBC, or all other major news outlets? OF COURSE NOT!!!
It's that BIASED Fox news!
Oh wait... obviously you didn't know who ABC,CBS,NBC voted for in the elections did you.
85% of media donated money to Democrats!
1,160 (85%) of the 1,353 of the Senior executives, on-air personalities, producers, reporters, editors, writers and other self-identifying employees of ABC, CBS and NBC contributed more than $1 million to Democrats candidates and campaign committees in 2008, according to an analysis by The Examiner of data compiled by the Center for Responsive Politics.
Obama Democrats got 88 percent of 2008 contributions by TV network execs writers reporters The Daily Caller

So proof of Obama support again and again by the MSM is further given in this story:
This story was first reported by the local press, and there have been vague references to sexual trouble for Bean and Lawson since June, but the national media has not picked it up. That oversight is politically convenient for President Obama as he tries to pull off one of his riskiest political moves ever with his amnesty executive order. - See more at: TMZ Politics Twitter Account Nails It MSM Goes Crazy Over Lauten Ignores Obama s Alleged Child-Rapist Fundraiser
TMZ Politics Twitter Account Nails It MSM Goes Crazy Over Lauten Ignores Obama s Alleged Child-Rapist Fundraiser

 

[Moonglow]

What about this statement?

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

Barack Obama October 2 2002

This is why that asshole refuses to call it
Islamic Extremism. He's a Muslim and refuses to fight against those radical Imams.

Tell that to the dead ones and the ones in prison during the Oblama presidency...

 

[rightwinger]

What about this statement?

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

Barack Obama October 2 2002

This is why that asshole refuses to call it
Islamic Extremism. He's a Muslim and refuses to fight against those radical Imams.

If we had listened to Obama, 6000 Americans would not have died from being treated as liberators

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Great thread. Lots of Democratic POLITICIANS caved into a feverish call for military action on the part of a very loud and very frightened electorate. Those chicken shit POLITICIANS listened to what Americans....who had been frightened by FOX NEWS and the BUSH ADMIN told them was needed.

I cheered when George stood on that pile of debris and promised justice. I was with that asshole 100%. He fucked up. Period.

WHERE did Bush Fuck up????
What about these assholes that encouraged the deaths of our troops! What kind of idiot are you to call them the good guys and Bush fucked UP?
Explain to me how come the MSM every every day put up all these casualties and idiots like THESE helped the terrorists prolong the conflict by tell them hey... our guys are the bad guys! You guys are the good guys!
These words from these DEMOCRATS encouraged as this Harvard Study proved that when words of emboldment are put out there was a increase in violence!
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."

Remember Kerry EARLIER SAID...
"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,”

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 "

These comments inflamed the terrorists AND demoralized our troops at the same time!

Bush was the dude in charge. What he chose to do was a huge mistake. I don't care if every Democrat in congress begged him to invade Iraq. He did it. It was a mistake. He fucked up. Period.

Invading Iraq wasn't a mistake. Leaving Itaq for ISIS to take control is. Bush = right course. Obama = A fuck up

 

[TooTall]

Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups.

President Bush addresses the nation as the Iraq war
begins in March 2003.

"In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003," reads an overview of the examination, conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism.

According to the study, Bush and seven top officials -- including Vice President Dick Cheney, former Secretary of State Colin Powell and then-National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice -- made 935 false statements about Iraq during those two years.

The study was based on a searchable database compiled of primary sources, such as official government transcripts and speeches, and secondary sources -- mainly quotes from major media organizations.

Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war - CNN.com

I guess the Republicans got their talking points from these leading Democrats.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
- President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998 | Source

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998 | Source

"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction." - Madeline Albright, Feb 1, 1998 | Source

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998 | Source

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton. - (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, Oct. 9, 1998 | Source

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998 | Source

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999 | Source

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002 | Source

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do"
-- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002 | Source

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002 | Source

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 | Source

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003 | Source

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002 | Source

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

 

[Bfgrn]

What about this statement?

But I also know that Saddam poses no imminent and direct threat to the United States, or to his neighbors, that the Iraqi economy is in shambles, that the Iraqi military a fraction of its former strength, and that in concert with the international community he can be contained until, in the way of all petty dictators, he falls away into the dustbin of history.

Barack Obama October 2 2002

How did he know???? How did HE know MORE then the CIA/DOJ, M6, Interpol,etc... UN??? UN didn't know for sure Iraq wasn't a threat.
Besides Bush NEVER said Iraq was an IMMINENT THREAT and BUSH agreed with Obama!

Here is WHAT Bush said...
[Briefing Room The White House"] Briefing Room The White House

"Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent.
Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike?
If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late.
Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option."

For some reason a freak'n community organizer was balls accurate on Iraq while asshole G W Bush pushed us into a war that killed 6000 Americans

No wonder he is president

And YOU helped KILL those 6,000 Americans by endorsing STATEMENTS like this that Obama, et.al. made you dumb f...k!
YOU don't discourage your own troops and encourage the enemy by making statements like these!

Senator Obama said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"
AT FIRST he said this:
"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
THEN after Bush took Kerry at his word... DISARM Saddam... this butthead turns around and calls our troops terrorists!

Senator Kerry (D) "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."

And this idiot calling our troops cold blooded killers! How helpful! U.S. Rep. John Murtha(D)"Our troops killed innocent civilians in cold blood,”

Durbin (D) "must have been done by Nazis, Soviets"--action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.
And of course everyone KNOWS ALL of American troops are NAZIS Soviets... Killers!
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "
These dumb deceitful, traitorous statements even idiots like YOU have to admit DIDN"T HELP our troops
BUT ENCOURAGED the terrorists who used these idiotic traitorous statements to recruit more terrorists!
Hell even Harvard study PROVED that idiots like the above and you by endorsing them PROLONGED
the conflict. Gave encouragement! Made the enemy look justified and therefore get more recruits to kill more troops!

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.

Hey MORON, NO ONE created more terrorists than Bush with his war on Islam, torture and prisoner abuse of Muslims in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo and his moribund rhetoric.

AN INTERROGATOR SPEAKS
I'm Still Tortured by What I Saw in Iraq

I learned in Iraq that the No. 1 reason foreign fighters flocked there to fight were the abuses carried out at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo. Our policy of torture was directly and swiftly recruiting fighters for al-Qaeda in Iraq. The large majority of suicide bombings in Iraq are still carried out by these foreigners. They are also involved in most of the attacks on U.S. and coalition forces in Iraq. It's no exaggeration to say that at least half of our losses and casualties in that country have come at the hands of foreigners who joined the fray because of our program of detainee abuse. The number of U.S. soldiers who have died because of our torture policy will never be definitively known, but it is fair to say that it is close to the number of lives lost on Sept. 11, 2001. How anyone can say that torture keeps Americans safe is beyond me -- unless you don't count American soldiers as Americans.

Washington Post

Matthew Alexander led an interrogations team assigned to a Special Operations task force in Iraq in 2006. He is an eighteen-year veteran of the Air Force and Air Force Reserves. As a former senior military interrogator, he conducted or supervised over 1,300 interrogations in Iraq and was awarded the Bronze Star Medal for his achievements. Alexander is a four-time combat veteran of Bosnia, Kosovo, and Iraq.

WOW! Something NOT ONE SINGLE PERSON didn't know about as Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo were plastered all over the news day and night all the time!
What type of world wide outrage would we see if day and night all the time pictures and stories of the absolute REAL tortures and REAL deaths caused by the
terrorists?

Eleven U.S. soldiers were convicted of crimes relating to the Abu Ghraib scandal. Seven of those were from Maryland-based 372nd Military Police Company. A number of other service members were not charged but reprimanded. Iraq Prison Abuse Scandal Fast Facts - CNN.com
11 out of 2.5 million! And the idiot press along with idiots like YOU blew Abu Ghraib out of gross proportion so BLAME them and YOU for the deaths.
11 people!
Since the U.S. went to war in Afghanistan in 2001 and Iraq in 2003, about 2.5 million members of the Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force, Coast Guard and related Reserve and National Guard units have been deployed in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars, according to Department of Defense data. Of those, more than a third were deployed more than once. united states - How many Americans served in the Afgan and Iraq wars from 2001 to 2013 - Skeptics Stack Exchange

Where are the day and night blasting the news stories about :
ISIS putting price tags on Iraqi children, selling them as slaves, U.N. says
By Faith Karimi and Greg Botelho, CNN
Where are the day and might blasting on the news of this:

Islamic State selling, crucifying, burying children alive in Iraq - UN
Updated 4:26 PM ET, Fri February 6, 2015 Islamic State selling crucifying burying children alive in Iraq - UN Reuters

Where are these stories?
11 members of the military in Abu Ghraib were convicted ...YET that was never blasted day and night all the time!

Where were THESE pictures day and night blasting the news all the time??

See the problem with dummies like you is you BELIEVE everything that the biased Bush bashing MSM put out because YOU wanted to!
Didn't care for the facts that Clinton ORDERED the removal of Saddam in 1998 Liberation of Iraq but lacking the balls as they were busy screwing Monica,
he like most of you blowhards never followed through!
YEA you nut-less blowhards believed all those stories blasted day and night by the biased MSM that hated Bush and you like these idiots blame the
troops!
Senator Kerry (D) calling solders TERRORISTS!!! "American soldiers going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children."
Senator Obama calling our troops "civilian killers"......... said "troops are air-raiding villages and killing civilians,"
Terrorist Cheerleader telling them THEY won...Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid(D) "The war is lost, the surge is not accomplishing anything "

Unbelievable that dummies like you follow traitors like the above.

View attachment 36592 View attachment 36593 View attachment 36594

Hey pea brain...11 American soldiers did not create Abu Ghraib or Guantanamo. And NONE of them did anything they were not ORDERED to do. But you statists NEVER look up the chain of command, DO YOU?

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Quotes from dimwitted democrat before IRAQ...Infuckingcredible the LIARS that support this goddamn party on this message board.

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." --President Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." --Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." Letter to President Clinton, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them." -- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." -- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." -- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002 The KKK Kleagle

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" -- Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." -- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." -- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003

Liberals chant deny, deny, deny!

 

[kaz]

They invaded because Bush was looking for any excuse to invade

And they did that arm in arm with the party you Monica.

 

[jknowgood]

Bush and Bush alone ordered the invasion. At the time, the UN was asking for more time to prove there were no WMDs
Bush attacked before his phony WMDS story could fall apart

The UN SANCTIONS put in place by the UN simply asked Saddam "please certify you don't have WMDs" continued while Saddam let 576,000 children starve!
In five years 576,000 children starved BECAUSE SADDAM refused to certify WMD destruction!
The sanctions were imposed by the Security Council after Iraq invaded Kuwait in August 1990. Led by the United States, the Council has rejected many Iraqi appeals to lift the restrictions, which have crippled the economy, until Iraq accounts for all its weapons of mass destruction and United Nations inspectors can certify that they have been destroyed in accordance with several Council resolutions.
Iraq Sanctions Kill Children U.N. Reports - NYTimes.com

NOW you idiots tell me IF Saddam refused to CERTIFY and he obviously didn't care about the starving kids... would you believe he HAD WMDs?
Would you believe his son in law?
A) Saddam was not ready to say he had NO WMDs and willing to let 576,000 kids starve.
B) Saddam WAS proven by the Democrats to having used WMDs on his own people.
C) Saddam was proven to pay $25,000 for suicide terrorists.
D) Ask Saddam's son-in-law...oh wait you can't Saddam killed him when he went back to Iraq... good guy your buddy Saddam!
E) And of course you probably don't agree after 9/11 there was NO need to think Saddam was involved right?
F) Were you aware 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. And of course you knew that your buddy Saddam HAD nothing to do with it...even Saddam Hussein's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth.
It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare capability notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism; 2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157 aerial bombs.
And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually greatly understated its production.

Oddly, Republicans claimed to invade because of UN sanctions

Yet, when that same UN asked them to hold off the invasion until more evidence came in........they ignored them

You're hildabeast voted for the war.