Combat troops leaving Iraq

Superfreak said:
Again, as stated many times in the past... Saddam had played the "I am complying" game with the UN many times over the previous decade. The second he thought we weren't actually coming in, he would have simply restarted his games. You keep pretending that 'this time' it was somehow different.

As for the NIE's.... then do tell us why it is that the Dems voted to allow Bush to use force? They also received that intel... why would they not come out and state it? Oh yeah, they were 'duped' by the ignorant Bush man.
Click to expand...

Oh, please - give me a break. You're actually using the resolution? That's desperate.

Despite the extensive rewriting of history, that resolution was framed AT THE TIME as a "show of unity" to Saddam, to force his hand. It was wrapped in nice colorful patriotic tones, as well; anyone who voted against it was portrayed as being a terrorist sympathizer or traitor.

I don't give any Dems a pass on this; they're politicians, and many took the easy political route. Given the results, that decision was pretty cowardly in retrospect.

As for "Bush duping them," that's exactly what Dick Armey - no Dem, btw - said, so don't take my word for it.
 
Onceler said:
So what if he was complying because troops were amassed at the border? He was complying. The inspectors could have done their job, and we could have verified what it took us 7 year, over a trillion dollars and many lives to find out.

NIE's from 2001-2003 repeatedly stated that Saddam was not even a threat to his immediate neighbors. No way around that one. I wasn't "keeping it to myself." It was out there for anyone who even had the slightest interest in avoiding an unnecessary 7-year war to peruse.
Click to expand...

Even before that, according to records.

"Hussein Kamel, the highest-ranking Iraqi official ever to defect from Saddam Hussein's inner circle, told CIA and British intelligence officers and U.N. inspectors in the summer of 1995 that after the gulf war, Iraq destroyed all its chemical and biological weapons stocks and the missiles to deliver them."

KAMEL WAS SADDAM Hussein's son-in-law and had direct knowledge of what he claimed: for 10 years he had run Iraq's nuclear, chemical, biological and missile programs. Kamel told his Western interrogators that he hoped his revelations would trigger Saddam's overthrow. But after six months in exile in Jordan, Kamel realized the United States would not support his dream of becoming Iraq's ruler after Saddam's demise. He chose to return to Iraq -- where he was promptly killed.

Kamel's revelations about the destruction of Iraq's WMD stocks were hushed up by the U.N. inspectors, sources say, for two reasons. Saddam did not know how much Kamel had revealed, and the inspectors hoped to bluff Saddam into disclosing still more. And Iraq has never shown the documentation to support Kamel's story. Still, the defector's tale raises questions about whether the WMD stockpiles attributed to Iraq still exist.

(Interview here www.casi.org.uk/info/unscom950822.pdf)

http://www.ratical.org/ratville/CAH/Kamel022403.html
 
Mott the Hoople said:
You're damned straight we shouldn't have gone in. Doing so, particularly on what turned out to be false and misleading information was immoral as hell when you consider that Iraq did not present a clear and present danger to our national security which was the ONLY VALID REASON TO GO TO WAR WITH THEM!

Anything else is just the nit witted rationalizations of a bunch of chicken hawks.
Click to expand...

right.... because to you, it is only about you. which is why YOU and those that think like you sit by and do nothing when others are in danger. If it doesn't effect you personally, then it is not worth fighting for. It is that attitude that kept us from entering WWII earlier as we should have. It is that attitude that kept us from doing what was right in Rwanda and in the Sudan and in Somalia.

Like I said, you preferred we simply let the starvation, rape and murder of the Iraqi people continue because hey... Saddam was not an imminent threat to you or this country.

Note to Mott. Germany was not a threat to our national security. Neither was the Ottoman empire. In fact, with our military, if we were to pull back all troops from around the world, NO ONE would ever provide a legitimate threat to invade and few would possess the capability to attack us with WMDs without AMD.

There you have it.... just become a complete isolationist and be willing to stand by and do nothing and we will never go to war again. Just let them kill the Jews, the Tutsi's and the civilians in Darfur. Fuck em all... right Mott?
 
Thank GOD that President Obama was able to end this long national nightmare of a mistake of a premptive war.


Three cheers for President OBAMA!



Now for him to end the long national nightmare of the recession, it might take 7 years to clean up that mess also!
 
Superfreak said:
A perfect example of why idiotic politicians should not set specific dates or set expectations like Cheney did of an approximate amount of time.

Thank you for proving my point.
Click to expand...

No problem. It's interesting, because both you & Damo seem to be contending that the pullout was right on Bush's timeline, and I could have sworn that Cheney was in the Bush admin.
 
Superfreak said:
A perfect example of why idiotic politicians should not set specific dates or set expectations like Cheney did of an approximate amount of time.

Thank you for proving my point.
Click to expand...

Its not that Cheney chose a date, it simply illistrates how out of touch and uninformed Cheney was abou tthe war he supported starting.
 
Jarod said:
Thank GOD that President Obama was able to end this long national nightmare of a mistake of a premptive war.


Three cheers for President OBAMA!



Now for him to end the long national nightmare of the recession, it might take 7 years to clean up that mess also!
Click to expand...

It was the Petraeus surge that ended this war.
 
Jarod said:
Strange, I thought that Bush would not publish timelines because it was giving stragety away to the enemy...
Click to expand...
This was the Bush "timeline"(2004)....timeline ...meaning steps of what is planned..

Bush outlined five broad steps to restore Iraqi sovereignty and get the country back on its feet:
Handing over authority to a sovereign Iraqi government.
Establishing security.
Continuing to rebuild Iraq's infrastructure.
Encouraging more international support.
Moving toward a national election in Iraq that "will bring forward new leaders empowered by the Iraqi people."
 
Jarod said:
Thank GOD that President Obama was able to end this long national nightmare of a mistake of a premptive war.


Three cheers for President OBAMA!



Now for him to end the long national nightmare of the recession, it might take 7 years to clean up that mess also!
Click to expand...
:rofl::lol::rofl::lol::rofl::lol::rofl:

I used to say Ignorance isn't bliss...Ignorance is dangerous...

But its obvious in Jarods case...

Ignorance is bliss....
 
Onceler said:
No problem. It's interesting, because both you & Damo seem to be contending that the pullout was right on Bush's timeline, and I could have sworn that Cheney was in the Bush admin.
Click to expand...

you are pulling a quote from 2003.... that was when Bush HAD no plan and was FUBAR'ing the situation.

I am talking about the game plan once Petraeus took over and requested the surge that Bush then approved.
 
Onceler said:
No problem. It's interesting, because both you & Damo seem to be contending that the pullout was right on Bush's timeline, and I could have sworn that Cheney was in the Bush admin.
Click to expand...
Now if you think, really, really, hard...use pictures if you have to....you'll find out that Cheney...ISN'T Bush....take your time....I heard dementia is a problem for you pinheads.
 
Jarod said:
Its not that Cheney chose a date, it simply illistrates how out of touch and uninformed Cheney was abou tthe war he supported starting.
Click to expand...

yes, it IS that Cheney gave a fairly specific time frame (6 months) that shows exactly why idiotic politicians should NOT be giving such 'guidance' to the general public. It highlights the EXACT problem I mentioned with doing so. It either makes the politician a "liar" or "uninformed". Neither of which is a good thing.
 
evince said:
No more war in Iraq.

This is what brought me to you people and all these years later it is over
Click to expand...
I am thankful and wish the rest of the 56,000 could come home, too. I have been watching the soldier reunite with their families and I am all teary eyed!
 
Superfreak said:
you are pulling a quote from 2003.... that was when Bush HAD no plan and was FUBAR'ing the situation.

I am talking about the game plan once Petraeus took over and requested the surge that Bush then approved.
Click to expand...


The surge that then Senator Obama was a primary naysayer of, he even denied its actual success.
 
Last edited:
bravo said:
Now if you think, really, really, hard...use pictures if you have to....you'll find out that Cheney...ISN'T Bush....take your time....I heard dementia is a problem for you pinheads.
Click to expand...

Look at that - one week, you though "Bush was a clown too," the next, you're back defending him to the hilt.

I have heard righties on this board blame Obama for things that local DEA agents said & did since he took office. Cheney, by most accounts, was the most powerful VP in decades - he spoke for the admin as much as anyone.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top