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

[Kosh]

lol, of course. That's not even a good dodge.

Dodge this:

How can Obama commit to a long term military re-intervention in Iraq without the support of the American people? How does that work?

The same way it worked with Obamacare, that American people did not support.

So Obama should go to Congress and ask for a new AUMF for Iraq, and when it fails, you will admit that people like myself are right and you're wrong?

lol

So yes the far left supports Obama's illegal air strikes in Iraq.

There it is confirmation that these illegal acts are Ok as long as there is a (D) next to the name.

 

[NYcarbineer]

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

If he thought they were moved, why the **** would he tell you moron?????????????????????????????? Think about it, shit for brains. There would be no way to prove that they moved ....................without sending in an entire army to wherever he believed they were moved to. You think it would be smart to invade a second country in that scenario idiot? What any President would do in that case is drop it. In that scenario he could out every single one of his sensitive sources and it still wouldn't convince everyone till the press had their hands on the WMD.

Now of course I do thank you for demonstrating JUST HOW MANY OTHER LEGITIMATE ORGANIZATIONS AND COUNTRIES THOUGHT THE SAME THING when you tards like to make it sound like he did it cuz of daddy.

But no, you're wrong. When he said "there weren't any," the only place he can vouch for without directly invading somewhere else and exhaustively searching is Iraq.


He couldn't even be vouching for anywhere but Iraq even if he wanted, dim wit.

lol. Stop digging. Nobody except a handful of conspiracy nuts believe that Saddam had WMD's that were moved.

Go have a drink with the birthers.

Besides...

If Saddam had had the WMD programs that the administration claimed he had, he would have had to have had thousands of people working in those programs.

How come we never found the PEOPLE? Were they moved too, lol? Were they beamed to another planet?

See, you have to THINK before you sign on to these absurd myths.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The same way it worked with Obamacare, that American people did not support.

So Obama should go to Congress and ask for a new AUMF for Iraq, and when it fails, you will admit that people like myself are right and you're wrong?

lol

So yes the far left supports Obama's illegal air strikes in Iraq.

There it is confirmation that these illegal acts are Ok as long as there is a (D) next to the name.

Who is this 'far left' you keep talking about? Could you at least identify it?

 

[EconChick]

Oh Wow ~ Obama now claims he had "Bad Intelligence estimates" for not anticipating the speed in which ISIS would capture large sections of Iraq.
How come I've been reading about ISIS for months just like everyone else except Obama. Sort of like Boooooooosh lying about WMDs in Iraq. Bad Intell.
Our POTUS is a liar ~~ And he has just shown to the world what a real liar he is.

Obama: Bad Intelligence Behind ISIS Underestimation

Great post, BM. That's another thing that made me laugh about his presser. Like you said, it was in open source for God's sake and he expects us to believe the intel community didn't see it coming. What he meant was he ignored the intel community.

He threw the intel community under the bus...once again.

I keep waiting for people still employed in the community to just quit and go public with what a complete idiot Obama is.

 

[Kosh]

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

If he thought they were moved, why the **** would he tell you moron?????????????????????????????? Think about it, shit for brains. There would be no way to prove that they moved ....................without sending in an entire army to wherever he believed they were moved to. You think it would be smart to invade a second country in that scenario idiot? What any President would do in that case is drop it. In that scenario he could out every single one of his sensitive sources and it still wouldn't convince everyone till the press had their hands on the WMD.

Now of course I do thank you for demonstrating JUST HOW MANY OTHER LEGITIMATE ORGANIZATIONS AND COUNTRIES THOUGHT THE SAME THING when you tards like to make it sound like he did it cuz of daddy.

But no, you're wrong. When he said "there weren't any," the only place he can vouch for without directly invading somewhere else and exhaustively searching is Iraq.


He couldn't even be vouching for anywhere but Iraq even if he wanted, dim wit.

lol. Stop digging. Nobody except a handful of conspiracy nuts believe that Saddam had WMD's that were moved.

Go have a drink with the birthers.

Besides...

If Saddam had had the WMD programs that the administration claimed he had, he would have had to have had thousands of people working in those programs.

How come we never found the PEOPLE? Were they moved too, lol? Were they beamed to another planet?

See, you have to THINK before you sign on to these absurd myths.

This is all pointless now since you a far left Obama drone has admitted that it is OK for someone with a (D) next to their name to lie and commit illegal acts in Iraq.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why did Americans believe Bush when he said there were WMD's, but refuse to believe him when he said his greatest disappointment was there were no WMD's? Are you calling him a liar? Which time?

There's that certain contingent of the neocon right, Econchick being a textbook example, who suffer a pathological aversion to admitting they were wrong about WMD's.

They will never be cured of that affliction.

You dumbasses can always be counted on to divert from threads where Obama is the topic but for the umpteenth time, none in Iraq.

I know your brains have a hard time with complexity, but that's not going to save your party anymore.

Now let's get back to your hero crashing and burning.

None anywhere. Period. You might as well be claiming that they were moved to Graceland, and Elvis is personally guarding them,

and that must be true because we can't prove it isn't.

 

[Moonglow]

#177 was his attempt to justify his lying, and it failed, as expected.

Well, if you are ignorant then it usually shows in the pudding...and that post is a big bowl of pudding...

So the far left propaganda of 2003 to 2009 do not apply except to those that have an (R) next to their name.

Perfect example of how the far left are the true hypocrites.

There is some for and some against on the far left..Just like on the far right..Call it like you want but it's still not correct...

 

[kiwiman127]

Iraq War ends on Bush’s schedule, not Obama’s
President Obama and the biased media wing of the Democrat Party are heralding the “official” end of the Iraq War.
<snip>
All US troops, except for 159 uniformed troops and officers as well as a marine guard in the US embassy in Baghdad, will be out of Iraq before December 31, 2011, as required by the Status of Forces Agreement President Bush made with Iraq.
The Democrats can trumpet the Obama Iraq withdrawal all they want, but it was accomplished right on schedule — a schedule established by President Bush, not Obama.
Iraq War ends on Bush's schedule, not Obama's | RedState
==========================================
How times change.

McCain says those who say that Maliki didn't want to renegotiate are liars. Plain and simple. He was there at the table.

McCain: Opponents lying about Iraq history

And here's the key point. I do wish every one would stop lying about this. Because simply put Obama just wanted to get the **** out of there instead of keeping the country stable.

And hey, frankly I don't blame him but it was a huge whoopsies. Because now Iraq is being taken over by ISIS,

McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) were in direct talks with the Iraqi government at the time, McCain said, and Iraq was ready for a deal before the number of troops the United States proposed leaving fell sharply.

"What Senator Kaine is saying is just totally false," McCain said. "In fact, it's a lie, because Lindsey Graham and I were there."

"The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff himself said that the number of troops that we were proposing cascaded down to 3,000, when it had been recommended to be 20,000," McCain added.

He said Iraq, at that point, determined an agreement “wasn't worth the problem.”

McCain: Opponents lying about Iraq history | TheHill

I guess Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is lying in this Wall Street Journal interview then.

Iraq Wants the U.S. Out
Prime Minister, in Interview, Says Troops Must Leave Next Year as Planned
BAGHDAD—Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ruled out the presence of any U.S. troops in Iraq after the end of 2011, saying his new government and the country's security forces were capable of confronting any remaining threats to Iraq's security, sovereignty and unity.
Mr. Maliki spoke with The Wall Street Journal in a two-hour interview, his first since Iraq ended nine months of stalemate and seated a new government after an inconclusive election, allowing Mr. Maliki to begin a second term as premier.
A majority of Iraqis—and some Iraqi and U.S. officials—have assumed the U.S. troop presence would eventually be extended, especially after the long government limbo. But Mr. Maliki was eager to draw a line in his most definitive remarks on the subject. "The last American soldier will leave Iraq" as agreed, he said, speaking at his office in a leafy section of Baghdad's protected Green Zone. "This agreement is not subject to extension, not subject to alteration. It is sealed."
Iraqi Prime Minister Says U.S. Forces Must Leave On Time - WSJ

 

[Kosh]

So Obama should go to Congress and ask for a new AUMF for Iraq, and when it fails, you will admit that people like myself are right and you're wrong?

lol

So yes the far left supports Obama's illegal air strikes in Iraq.

There it is confirmation that these illegal acts are Ok as long as there is a (D) next to the name.

Who is this 'far left' you keep talking about? Could you at least identify it?

You are the far left and you support the far left that openly hijacked the (D) party back in the late 70's or deny actual real history once again?

It is ok you have admitted that is OK with anyone that has a (D) next to their name to lie and commit illegal acts in Iraq.

But that comes from being a programed far left Obama drone.

 

[Moonglow]

There's that certain contingent of the neocon right, Econchick being a textbook example, who suffer a pathological aversion to admitting they were wrong about WMD's.

They will never be cured of that affliction.

You dumbasses can always be counted on to divert from threads where Obama is the topic but for the umpteenth time, none in Iraq.

I know your brains have a hard time with complexity, but that's not going to save your party anymore.

Now let's get back to your hero crashing and burning.

None anywhere. Period. You might as well be claiming that they were moved to Graceland, and Elvis is personally guarding them,

and that must be true because we can't prove it isn't.

Some think that winning an argument is by being obtuse...

 

[Kosh]

There's that certain contingent of the neocon right, Econchick being a textbook example, who suffer a pathological aversion to admitting they were wrong about WMD's.

They will never be cured of that affliction.

You dumbasses can always be counted on to divert from threads where Obama is the topic but for the umpteenth time, none in Iraq.

I know your brains have a hard time with complexity, but that's not going to save your party anymore.

Now let's get back to your hero crashing and burning.

None anywhere. Period. You might as well be claiming that they were moved to Graceland, and Elvis is personally guarding them,

and that must be true because we can't prove it isn't.

Yes the far left will not admit to voting for worse than Bush twice..

 

[Kosh]

Well, if you are ignorant then it usually shows in the pudding...and that post is a big bowl of pudding...

So the far left propaganda of 2003 to 2009 do not apply except to those that have an (R) next to their name.

Perfect example of how the far left are the true hypocrites.

There is some for and some against on the far left..Just like on the far right..Call it like you want but it's still not correct...

No the far left will follow lock and step with Obama on this as you have demonstrated. You followed it without question or hesitation.

You will defend and deflect that Obama is committing illegal acts in Iraq and will denounce anyone with an (R) for doing the same things. That is if you believe all the far left blog sites.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Oh Wow ~ Obama now claims he had "Bad Intelligence estimates" for not anticipating the speed in which ISIS would capture large sections of Iraq.
How come I've been reading about ISIS for months just like everyone else except Obama. Sort of like Boooooooosh lying about WMDs in Iraq. Bad Intell.
Our POTUS is a liar ~~ And he has just shown to the world what a real liar he is.

Obama: Bad Intelligence Behind ISIS Underestimation

Great post, BM. That's another thing that made me laugh about his presser. Like you said, it was in open source for God's sake and he expects us to believe the intel community didn't see it coming. What he meant was he ignored the intel community.

He threw the intel community under the bus...once again.

I keep waiting for people still employed in the community to just quit and go public with what a complete idiot Obama is.

Since you don't support him taking action, what's the difference?

 

[Kosh]

You dumbasses can always be counted on to divert from threads where Obama is the topic but for the umpteenth time, none in Iraq.

I know your brains have a hard time with complexity, but that's not going to save your party anymore.

Now let's get back to your hero crashing and burning.

None anywhere. Period. You might as well be claiming that they were moved to Graceland, and Elvis is personally guarding them,

and that must be true because we can't prove it isn't.

Some think that winning an argument is by being obtuse...

Yes the far left excels at that!

 

[Katzndogz]

Anything obuma does in Iraq will fail because he has no concept of victory. He believes and democrats believe, that there are no more terrorists. Al quaeda is defeated. It's on the run. ISIS is inconsequential. It's JV.

As long as this muslim pond scum says to us "we're coming for you. The flag of Allah will fly over the white house." This is our fight. When they say the flag of Allah will fly over the Kremlin and tell Beijing we're coming for you it won't be our fight. Now it is.

 

[Kosh]

Oh Wow ~ Obama now claims he had "Bad Intelligence estimates" for not anticipating the speed in which ISIS would capture large sections of Iraq.
How come I've been reading about ISIS for months just like everyone else except Obama. Sort of like Boooooooosh lying about WMDs in Iraq. Bad Intell.
Our POTUS is a liar ~~ And he has just shown to the world what a real liar he is.

Obama: Bad Intelligence Behind ISIS Underestimation

Great post, BM. That's another thing that made me laugh about his presser. Like you said, it was in open source for God's sake and he expects us to believe the intel community didn't see it coming. What he meant was he ignored the intel community.

He threw the intel community under the bus...once again.

I keep waiting for people still employed in the community to just quit and go public with what a complete idiot Obama is.

Since you don't support him taking action, what's the difference?

Since you do support Obama's illegal action, what difference does it make?

 

[Kosh]

Iraq War ends on Bush’s schedule, not Obama’s
President Obama and the biased media wing of the Democrat Party are heralding the “official” end of the Iraq War.
<snip>
All US troops, except for 159 uniformed troops and officers as well as a marine guard in the US embassy in Baghdad, will be out of Iraq before December 31, 2011, as required by the Status of Forces Agreement President Bush made with Iraq.
The Democrats can trumpet the Obama Iraq withdrawal all they want, but it was accomplished right on schedule — a schedule established by President Bush, not Obama.
Iraq War ends on Bush's schedule, not Obama's | RedState
==========================================
How times change.

McCain says those who say that Maliki didn't want to renegotiate are liars. Plain and simple. He was there at the table.

McCain: Opponents lying about Iraq history

And here's the key point. I do wish every one would stop lying about this. Because simply put Obama just wanted to get the **** out of there instead of keeping the country stable.

And hey, frankly I don't blame him but it was a huge whoopsies. Because now Iraq is being taken over by ISIS,

McCain and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) were in direct talks with the Iraqi government at the time, McCain said, and Iraq was ready for a deal before the number of troops the United States proposed leaving fell sharply.

"What Senator Kaine is saying is just totally false," McCain said. "In fact, it's a lie, because Lindsey Graham and I were there."

"The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff himself said that the number of troops that we were proposing cascaded down to 3,000, when it had been recommended to be 20,000," McCain added.

He said Iraq, at that point, determined an agreement “wasn't worth the problem.”

McCain: Opponents lying about Iraq history | TheHill

I guess Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki is lying in this Wall Street Journal interview then.

Iraq Wants the U.S. Out
Prime Minister, in Interview, Says Troops Must Leave Next Year as Planned
BAGHDAD—Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki ruled out the presence of any U.S. troops in Iraq after the end of 2011, saying his new government and the country's security forces were capable of confronting any remaining threats to Iraq's security, sovereignty and unity.
Mr. Maliki spoke with The Wall Street Journal in a two-hour interview, his first since Iraq ended nine months of stalemate and seated a new government after an inconclusive election, allowing Mr. Maliki to begin a second term as premier.
A majority of Iraqis—and some Iraqi and U.S. officials—have assumed the U.S. troop presence would eventually be extended, especially after the long government limbo. But Mr. Maliki was eager to draw a line in his most definitive remarks on the subject. "The last American soldier will leave Iraq" as agreed, he said, speaking at his office in a leafy section of Baghdad's protected Green Zone. "This agreement is not subject to extension, not subject to alteration. It is sealed."
Iraqi Prime Minister Says U.S. Forces Must Leave On Time - WSJ

These far left posters will just continue posting their known debunked material..

 

[EconChick]

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

If he thought they were moved, why the **** would he tell you moron?????????????????????????????? Think about it, shit for brains. There would be no way to prove that they moved ....................without sending in an entire army to wherever he believed they were moved to. You think it would be smart to invade a second country in that scenario idiot? What any President would do in that case is drop it. In that scenario he could out every single one of his sensitive sources and it still wouldn't convince everyone till the press had their hands on the WMD.

Now of course I do thank you for demonstrating JUST HOW MANY OTHER LEGITIMATE ORGANIZATIONS AND COUNTRIES THOUGHT THE SAME THING when you tards like to make it sound like he did it cuz of daddy.

But no, you're wrong. When he said "there weren't any," the only place he can vouch for without directly invading somewhere else and exhaustively searching is Iraq.


He couldn't even be vouching for anywhere but Iraq even if he wanted, dim wit.

lol. Stop digging. Nobody except a handful of conspiracy nuts believe that Saddam had WMD's that were moved.

Go have a drink with the birthers.

Besides...

If Saddam had had the WMD programs that the administration claimed he had, he would have had to have had thousands of people working in those programs.

How come we never found the PEOPLE? Were they moved too, lol? Were they beamed to another planet?

See, you have to THINK before you sign on to these absurd myths.

I'm the conspiracy nut?

You never answered whether you've been to Iraq.

Clearly that's because you weren't.

I on the other hand spent a ton of time and spoke to a lot of people.

I'm merely pointing out that you can't slam the book shut yet on certain topics because there are certain unknowns NO ONE can answer yes or no to 100%.

And of all people, basement dwellers like you are the least qualified to talk about Iraq.

 

[EconChick]

But by all means carbon, the basement dweller, keep diverting from the real topic here.

You can.....but you notice how many Americans are up in arms about Obama now from all parties????

 

[NYcarbineer]

So yes the far left supports Obama's illegal air strikes in Iraq.

There it is confirmation that these illegal acts are Ok as long as there is a (D) next to the name.

Who is this 'far left' you keep talking about? Could you at least identify it?

You are the far left and you support the far left that openly hijacked the (D) party back in the late 70's or deny actual real history once again?

It is ok you have admitted that is OK with anyone that has a (D) next to their name to lie and commit illegal acts in Iraq.

But that comes from being a programed far left Obama drone.

Me? Well since my postions AGAINST military interventionism and meddling in the Middle East have been well established, on the record, for years,

that would be one big strike against your generalization now wouldn't it?

Here's another, from the Code Pink website. I don't suppose you'll try to pretend they aren't part of your so-called 'far left':

Tell President Obama: No U.S. military intervention in Iraq!

Please contact the president and tell him no more weapons shipments, no airstrikes, no US troops. The chaotic situation in Iraq is the direct result of the tragic US military intervention in 2003, which destabilized the region and put in power a corrupt and unrepresentative government.The people of Iraq need peace, reconciliation, development and a truly representative government, free of US and other foreign interests.

...so reconcile that with your asinine claim that the left has flip flopped just because Obama became president.

lolol you and Econchick are making this too easy. Step up your game.

CODEPINK: Take Action Now!