WOW, Anyone Just See Obama's Press Conf on IRAQ?

[EconChick]

Then I guess you'll accede to the validity of MSNBC's documentary on how the Bush administration blundered us into Iraq.

Once again you show your idiocy when it comes to LOGIC.

A proper analogy would be to say that I should accede to the validity of something coming out of a conservative outlet that YOU agreed with.

Jeeze, I'm really starting to change a long held belief that there should never be a poll test. Half wits like you and some of your allies on this board are really making me ponder it.

Ok. Then you accept the validity of GW Bush's statement in a 2005 news conference that there were no WMD's in Iraq.

Better?

It's true. They were NOT found IN Iraq, dumb shit.

 

[Bush92]

ISIS are well trained (American trained) former Sunni members of the Iraqi Army. They are no ******* joke. They have been kicking the Kurds ass and that really got my attention. We need to get Europe to send in troops and we will provide close air support. These ISIS fighters can shoot and know guerrilla warfare.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Once again you show your idiocy when it comes to LOGIC.

A proper analogy would be to say that I should accede to the validity of something coming out of a conservative outlet that YOU agreed with.

Jeeze, I'm really starting to change a long held belief that there should never be a poll test. Half wits like you and some of your allies on this board are really making me ponder it.

Ok. Then you accept the validity of GW Bush's statement in a 2005 news conference that there were no WMD's in Iraq.

Better?

It's true. They were NOT found IN Iraq, dumb shit.

That's not what Bush said. He said everyone thought Iraq had WMD's, but there were none.

So again. That's valid evidence, correct? That's a statement against interests.

 

[Kosh]

Ok. Then you accept the validity of GW Bush's statement in a 2005 news conference that there were no WMD's in Iraq.

Better?

It's true. They were NOT found IN Iraq, dumb shit.

That's not what Bush said. He said everyone thought Iraq had WMD's, but there were none.

So again. That's valid evidence, correct? That's a statement against interests.

And once again the far left deflects as they can not denounce their messiah for his illegal air strikes in Iraq.

 

[EconChick]

Still no outrage from the far left over Obama's illegal airstrikes in Iraq.

Thank you SO much, Kosh, for pressing them on the real topic while I fend off their diversions.

Notice they NEVER answer tough questions about O. They just obfuscate, deflect, ignore, make shit up.....

You know, for someone who hasn't yet stated her own positiion on the president's latest actions in Iraq,

aren't you a bit out of line demanding to know what the 'far left' thinks?

It doesn't matter what Obama does....even if it were the perfect plan. You know why? Because our enemies, especially ISIS, know he doesn't have the stomach for the long haul.

Why do you think we conservatives want assholes for Presidents and not nice guys?

We're going to be fucked till he leaves office, no matter if I sat down and gave him what I thought was the perfect plan. He doesn't have the credibility to carry it out.

 

[Bush92]

Cannot be stressed enough that ISIS was for the most part US trained, and now has US weapons systems. Very dangerous. Never should have got rid of Saddam and his saditistic sons. **** this is getting stupid in Iraq.

 

[EconChick]

Ok. Then you accept the validity of GW Bush's statement in a 2005 news conference that there were no WMD's in Iraq.

Better?

It's true. They were NOT found IN Iraq, dumb shit.

That's not what Bush said. He said everyone thought Iraq had WMD's, but there were none.

So again. That's valid evidence, correct? That's a statement against interests.

How many times do I have to tell you none IN Iraq moron?

How would Bush know 100% if they were somewhere else without sending in thousands of troops into THAT country to actually put their hands on them, dim wit?

 

[Missourian]

 

[Bush92]

For the record I was 100% opposed to 2nd Iraq War, for just this reason , but ISIS threat is reaching critical mass.

 

[NYcarbineer]

It's true. They were NOT found IN Iraq, dumb shit.

That's not what Bush said. He said everyone thought Iraq had WMD's, but there were none.

So again. That's valid evidence, correct? That's a statement against interests.

How many times do I have to tell you none IN Iraq moron?

How would Bush know 100% if they were somewhere else without sending in thousands of troops into THAT country to actually put their hands on them, dim wit?

You're making a fool of yourself.

Bush December 2005:

Q. You've talked about your decision to go to war and the bad intelligence. And you've carefully separated the intelligence from the decision, saying it was the right decision to go to war despite the problems with the intelligence, sir. But with respect, the intelligence helped you build public support for the war. And so I wonder if, now, as you look back, if you look at that intelligence and feel that the intelligence and your use of it might bear some responsibility for the current divisions in the country over the war and what can you do about it, sir?

PRESIDENT BUSH. Yeah. No, I appreciate that. I, first of all, I can understand why people were . . . well, wait a minute, everybody thought there was weapons of mass destruction. There weren't any. I felt the same way. We'd looked at the intelligence and felt certain that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Intelligence agencies around the world felt the same way, by the way. Members of the United States Congress looked at the National Intelligence Estimate - the same intelligence estimate I looked at - and came to the same conclusion, Wendell. So in other words, there was universal - there was a universal feeling that he had weapons of mass destruction.

...no, Bush didn't say they existed but were moved, or disappeared, or anything of the sort.

He admitted there weren't any.

You wanted a statement against interests by a conservative that I agree with because you admitted you would have to accept that as valid,

well, you got one. Now quit being an asshole and admit you've been had lolol.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/19/politics/19text-bush.html?pagewanted=6&_r=0

 

[PaintMyHouse]

It's true. They were NOT found IN Iraq, dumb shit.

That's not what Bush said. He said everyone thought Iraq had WMD's, but there were none.

So again. That's valid evidence, correct? That's a statement against interests.

And once again the far left deflects as they can not denounce their messiah for his illegal air strikes in Iraq.

Tenth time, where's the "illegal" part?

 

[Kosh]

That's not what Bush said. He said everyone thought Iraq had WMD's, but there were none.

So again. That's valid evidence, correct? That's a statement against interests.

How many times do I have to tell you none IN Iraq moron?

How would Bush know 100% if they were somewhere else without sending in thousands of troops into THAT country to actually put their hands on them, dim wit?

You're making a fool of yourself.

Bush December 2005:

Q. You've talked about your decision to go to war and the bad intelligence. And you've carefully separated the intelligence from the decision, saying it was the right decision to go to war despite the problems with the intelligence, sir. But with respect, the intelligence helped you build public support for the war. And so I wonder if, now, as you look back, if you look at that intelligence and feel that the intelligence and your use of it might bear some responsibility for the current divisions in the country over the war and what can you do about it, sir?

PRESIDENT BUSH. Yeah. No, I appreciate that. I, first of all, I can understand why people were . . . well, wait a minute, everybody thought there was weapons of mass destruction. There weren't any. I felt the same way. We'd looked at the intelligence and felt certain that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Intelligence agencies around the world felt the same way, by the way. Members of the United States Congress looked at the National Intelligence Estimate - the same intelligence estimate I looked at - and came to the same conclusion, Wendell. So in other words, there was universal - there was a universal feeling that he had weapons of mass destruction.

...no, Bush didn't say they existed but were moved, or disappeared, or anything of the sort.

He admitted there weren't any.

You wanted a statement against interests by a conservative that I agree with because you admitted you would have to accept that as valid,

well, you got one. Now quit being an asshole and admit you've been had lolol.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/19/politics/19text-bush.html?pagewanted=6&_r=0

Another diversion so the far left can justify backing Obama's illegal air strike in Iraq.

 

[NYcarbineer]

For the record I was 100% opposed to 2nd Iraq War, for just this reason , but ISIS threat is reaching critical mass.

Then you must support Obama for taking action. Go ahead. Be a man for once in your wretched joke of a life and be honest,

without equivocation or qualification.

 

[Moonglow]

Then I guess you'll accede to the validity of MSNBC's documentary on how the Bush administration blundered us into Iraq.

Still no outrage from the far left over Obama's illegal airstrikes in Iraq.

Thank you SO much, Kosh, for pressing them on the real topic while I fend off their diversions.

Notice they NEVER answer tough questions about O. They just obfuscate, deflect, ignore, make shit up.....

There are no illegal bombings going on in Iraq by the US, but maybe you can clear the muddy water a show us how they are illegal?

 

[NYcarbineer]

That's not what Bush said. He said everyone thought Iraq had WMD's, but there were none.

So again. That's valid evidence, correct? That's a statement against interests.

And once again the far left deflects as they can not denounce their messiah for his illegal air strikes in Iraq.

Tenth time, where's the "illegal" part?

Boehner endorsed the action, so it's hard to make the 'illegal' case.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

How many times do I have to tell you none IN Iraq moron?

How would Bush know 100% if they were somewhere else without sending in thousands of troops into THAT country to actually put their hands on them, dim wit?

You're making a fool of yourself.

Bush December 2005:

Q. You've talked about your decision to go to war and the bad intelligence. And you've carefully separated the intelligence from the decision, saying it was the right decision to go to war despite the problems with the intelligence, sir. But with respect, the intelligence helped you build public support for the war. And so I wonder if, now, as you look back, if you look at that intelligence and feel that the intelligence and your use of it might bear some responsibility for the current divisions in the country over the war and what can you do about it, sir?

PRESIDENT BUSH. Yeah. No, I appreciate that. I, first of all, I can understand why people were . . . well, wait a minute, everybody thought there was weapons of mass destruction. There weren't any. I felt the same way. We'd looked at the intelligence and felt certain that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. Intelligence agencies around the world felt the same way, by the way. Members of the United States Congress looked at the National Intelligence Estimate - the same intelligence estimate I looked at - and came to the same conclusion, Wendell. So in other words, there was universal - there was a universal feeling that he had weapons of mass destruction.

...no, Bush didn't say they existed but were moved, or disappeared, or anything of the sort.

He admitted there weren't any.

You wanted a statement against interests by a conservative that I agree with because you admitted you would have to accept that as valid,

well, you got one. Now quit being an asshole and admit you've been had lolol.

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/12/19/politics/19text-bush.html?pagewanted=6&_r=0

Another diversion so the far left can justify backing Obama's illegal air strike in Iraq.

Eleventh time, where is the "illegal" part?

 

[Moonglow]

That's not what Bush said. He said everyone thought Iraq had WMD's, but there were none.

So again. That's valid evidence, correct? That's a statement against interests.

And once again the far left deflects as they can not denounce their messiah for his illegal air strikes in Iraq.

Tenth time, where's the "illegal" part?

In their spacial mind...

 

[Bush92]

It's true. They were NOT found IN Iraq, dumb shit.

That's not what Bush said. He said everyone thought Iraq had WMD's, but there were none.

So again. That's valid evidence, correct? That's a statement against interests.

How many times do I have to tell you none IN Iraq moron?

How would Bush know 100% if they were somewhere else without sending in thousands of troops into THAT country to actually put their hands on them, dim wit?

You know I like ya Econ Girl,but...I have always felt, and believe W Bush and Cheney felt, that Saddam was fronting when he was hindering efforts of weapons inspectors in Iraq. He could not let Shia and Kurds know that he did not have any WMD. The pint of 2nd Iraq War was Neo-con theory on inserting democracy into that region and then it will spread. Never going to happen, but Neo-cons were going into Iraq from day 1 f W presidency. 9-11was a convenient excuse.

 

[Moonglow]

War Powers Act allows the president to take military action if not over 60 days without Congressional authority....

 

[Kosh]

And once again the far left deflects as they can not denounce their messiah for his illegal air strikes in Iraq.

Tenth time, where's the "illegal" part?

In their spacial mind...

Has been explained, sorry the far left can not accept their own terms of what is and is not legal.