Obama one of the Greats!

Wise Old Man said:
Spin alert.

Tell us what the Dems voted for.
Click to expand...

Did you read my post earlier? They voted to give Bush the authorization to use force if necessary. That's not a "resolution to invade." If Bush had dropped a nuke, would it have been a "resolution to nuke?"

Invasion was Bush's perogative; no one else's. It's on him. It's lovely that you'd like to give Democrats "credit." But Iraq is on Bush, and no one else.
 
bravo said:
Bush KNEW what the NIE and intelligence told him....thats what he KNEW....read it.
Click to expand...

"Suspicion" does not equal fact.

On the contrary, there was an extremely successful disinformation campaign coordinated by the CIA in furtherance of the government’s policy of seeking regime change in Iraq. The language of the document itself reveals a persistent dishonesty. It speaks of “deepened suspicions” that Iraq “had ongoing WMD programs” and “suspicions that Iraq continued to hide WMD.” Needless to say, however, the Iraq war was not sold to the public on the grounds that government officials and intelligence agencies had “suspicions” that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD). It was sold to the public with declarations that it was a known fact that Iraq had ongoing programs and stockpiles of WMD. The tacit acknowledgment that the actual evidence only supported “suspicions” that this was so by itself is proof of that the narrative of an “intelligence failure” is a fiction.
 
Thing1 said:
Did you read my post earlier? They voted to give Bush the authorization to use force if necessary. That's not a "resolution to invade." If Bush had dropped a nuke, would it have been a "resolution to nuke?"

Invasion was Bush's perogative; no one else's. It's on him. It's lovely that you'd like to give Democrats "credit." But Iraq is on Bush, and no one else.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It was obviously necessary because we invaded. Give us some names of the Dems who objected and said they didn't vote for invasion.
 
Thing1 said:
I think one of my favorite things about this whole history rewriting tactic is the fact that, right after Saddam's statue fell, the narrative was that Democrats were on the "wrong side of history" for opposing the invasion, and that Bush was a bold, visionary leader for making it happen.

Now, that is is regarded as one of the worst foreign policy decisions in history, there just isn't enough credit to go 'round. Why, Democrats practically spearheaded the effort to invade, and even had a resolution for it.
Click to expand...


After the Democrats voted to use force on Iraq, they backed off and like the hypocrites they are, started to oppose the war for political gain...we all know that.

Tell us something we don't know.
 
christiefan915 said:
"Suspicion" does not equal fact.

On the contrary, there was an extremely successful disinformation campaign coordinated by the CIA in furtherance of the government’s policy of seeking regime change in Iraq. The language of the document itself reveals a persistent dishonesty. It speaks of “deepened suspicions” that Iraq “had ongoing WMD programs” and “suspicions that Iraq continued to hide WMD.” Needless to say, however, the Iraq war was not sold to the public on the grounds that government officials and intelligence agencies had “suspicions” that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction (WMD). It was sold to the public with declarations that it was a known fact that Iraq had ongoing programs and stockpiles of WMD. The tacit acknowledgment that the actual evidence only supported “suspicions” that this was so by itself is proof of that the narrative of an “intelligence failure” is a fiction.
Click to expand...

I love it when you guys go down this road. No matter how many times you get hit with the facts whenever you attempt to rewrite history, you keep doing it. Talk about beating a dead horse......... Look at the dates on these quotes and tell us who was the President. Dumb asses.


"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
 
Wise Old Man said:
Exactly. It was obviously necessary because we invaded. Give us some names of the Dems who objected and said they didn't vote for invasion.
Click to expand...


The words of the "WAR" RESOLUTION speaks for itself....USE MILITARY FORCE....

It doesn't authorize any particular method of using force....not air strikes, bombs, bullets, or bullshit....
nor does it forbid any particular method of using military force....not invasion, not A bombs, not torpedoes, not anything.

Do you have a point or will you just continue as my sig. points out...
 
Last edited:
Wise Old Man said:
I love it when you guys go down this road. No matter how many times you get hit with the facts whenever you attempt to rewrite history, you keep doing it. Talk about beating a dead horse......... Look at the dates on these quotes and tell us who was the President. Dumb asses.


"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
Click to expand...

And all those fine folks made those comments AFTER they'd been shown the ginded-up intel provided by "curveball"
 
Those quotes are great. Which one calls for a full-scale ground invasion and 10-year occupation?

How about including that quote from Hans Blix from March of 2003, saying (just before we invaded) that UN inspectors had unfettered access to all suspected weapons sites, and just needed time?
 
Thing1 said:
Those quotes are great. Which one calls for a full-scale ground invasion and 10-year occupation?

How about including that quote from Hans Blix from March of 2003, saying (just before we invaded) that UN inspectors had unfettered access to all suspected weapons sites, and just needed time?
Click to expand...

Hans Blix is not a Democrat member of congress.

I don't have to tell you which one calls for a full-scale ground invasion and 10-year occupation. That isn't the point. The point is who voted for the invasion and what Dems were saying before Bush was even President that you keep trying to deny. Why do you keep lying to yourself? Is it that hard for you to face the truth? Take a vacation, clear your head, study up, and then come back when you have some facts to deal with.
 
Thing1 said:
Those quotes are great. Which one calls for a full-scale ground invasion and 10-year occupation?

How about including that quote from Hans Blix from March of 2003, saying (just before we invaded) that UN inspectors had unfettered access to all suspected weapons sites, and just needed time?
Click to expand...


And many of those quotes refer to Saddam's PRIOR attempts to develop WMD's.

But don't expect truth or clarity from partisan hacks like WOM.
 
Wise Old Man said:
Hans Blix is not a Democrat member of congress.

I don't have to tell you which one calls for a full-scale ground invasion and 10-year occupation. That isn't the point. The point is who voted for the invasion and what Dems were saying before Bush was even President that you keep trying to deny. Why do you keep lying to yourself? Is it that hard for you to face the truth? Take a vacation, clear your head, study up, and then come back when you have some facts to deal with.
Click to expand...

No one voted to invade. There was no such thing as a "resolution to invade."

Sorry, but that's in the books. It's a hard one to rewrite.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
And many of those quotes refer to Saddam's PRIOR attempts to develop WMD's.

But don't expect truth or clarity from partisan hacks like WOM.
Click to expand...

They were from Clinton's Presidency. None of them changed their words from when they said them until the invasion. Lying sack of shit.
 
Thing1 said:
No one voted to invade. There was no such thing as a "resolution to invade."

Sorry, but that's in the books. It's a hard one to rewrite.
Click to expand...

An invasion took place. Give us the words of Dems who voted and then saying they didn't vote for invasion. Show us. Back up your claim.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top