U.N. sanctions killed more iraqis then sadam ever did…
[quote]JeffR wrote:
[Big, long thing about how Clinton did the Iraq WMD thing first
[/quote]
Very good! You’ve got it. There’s not much difference between Republicans and Democrats, especially when it comes to sweet-talking an electorate that is in denial about its petroleum addiction.
To be fair to Clinton, in his day he had much less countervaling intelligence on WMDs than Mr. Bush was forced to ignore.
But no doubt Mr. Clinton could have risen to the occasion. After all, I don’t want to get in some partisan spat here, especially since I never voted for Clinton in the first place.
Liberals are immune to facts; maybe that’s what made them liberals in the first place.
Great, great post! Wish I had this info when all my lib colleagues were ranting!
For some reason, many teachers are insanely liberal also. That may explain the state of education in this country.
Another lame we were wrong (But you guys said some things too…) post. Look Jeffry we all know the president and admin made a huge mistake, but pointing out dems who weren’t president and not saying “we know where they are… (wmd that is)” and invading Iraq while ignoring all relevant military planning seems a little silly doesn’t it? It’s like you said Bush lied, people died. (Wait, Jeff, did the bush admin know where the wmd were? Yes or no. Was the wmd information powell presented fact or assertation? Yes or no. Did Cheyney know al queda ties (the prague meeting) were possibly bogus? Yes or no. Did the admin overstate the facts? Yes or no?)
While I commend this post, I must say JeffR you spend WAY too much time in here. Realize that the bleeders can not understand. Focus on BEING what we are. We can not point out the lib irregularities and hope they agreee with us…please…but it’s fun trying.
[quote]BigMike wrote:
U.N. sanctions killed more iraqis then sadam ever did…[/quote]
Whatever…this is BECAUSE of saddamm… And the UN was wrong? go away with this lame thing you have here.
[quote]pushharder wrote:
vroom wrote:
Jerffy is clearly insane.
Classic liberal tactic. Ignore the evidence. Ignore the truth. Attack the person who presented both.
[/quote]
Yeah, fucking right, were the ones ignoring the evidence and the truth. I’d fucking laugh if that wasn’t so sick!
[quote]hedo wrote:
vroom wrote:
Jerffy is clearly insane.
Why is he insane?
They are “quotes” from the oppositon making the same claim as the current administration, which this opposition now claims lied. Looks like they had the same view.[/quote]
Hmmmmmmmm…what is the definition of insanity again???
…ahh yes… “doing the same thing over and over again but expecting different results”…as in attacking the messenger if he dares to present facts that stray from the liberal mantra. Liberals having been doing that over and over again but expecting different results like…ummmmmm… well … winning elections?
endgamer711 has probably posted the most coherent post in this thread… or board for that matter.
[quote]Rockscar wrote:
While I commend this post, I must say JeffR you spend WAY too much time in here. Realize that the bleeders can not understand. Focus on BEING what we are. We can not point out the lib irregularities and hope they agreee with us…please…but it’s fun trying.[/quote]
You commend shill? Why?
Jeff just created another one of his patented dead wrong threads. Like Duelfer proving WMD and Jeff’s Insurgency in Detroit thread, this one debunks Jeff’s sarcastic “Bush Lied” tiltle by it’s very subject matter! It doesn’t really take too much brain power to remember who invaded Iraq…hint it wasn’t a dem. And of course we all remember the Bush admin writing Clinton a letter demanding regime change in Iraq, a desire well documented in various Bush admin documents via PNAC. For further evidence just look at the various Downing Street Memos—memos that the so-called liberal media claims aren’t so important because they say what the media thinks everybody already knows—intel fixed around policy.(example: “we know where they (wmd) are.” Hey if you know–why didn’t you tell the inspectors? HA!)
[quote]hedo wrote:
vroom wrote:
Jerffy is clearly insane.
Why is he insane?
They are “quotes” from the oppositon making the same claim as the current administration, which this opposition now claims lied. Looks like they had the same view.[/quote]
Uhmmm…are they the same claims? I don’t see any claims using definitive fact of WMD as a pretense to invade Iraq? See hedo, the lied part as we all know, were the definitive claims of wmd and al-queda ties—despite the intel, to justify invading. Let’s not even mention the whole “No nation building” either…
How many of you have been to Iraq?
How many of you know about the 155mm shell that contained seren gas?
How many of you know about the basements of scientists’ houses that had all the ingredients needed to make such chemical weapons?
How many of you know anything about the intelligence community?
I think people need to stop being spoon-fed the leftist agenda that the major news networks put out. If people would independently verify facts instead of believing everything they hear on CNN, they would know that there was a dramatic increase in convoy traffic coming out of suspected weapons plants in Iraq right before the invasion. They would also know that many top level Iraqi officials still believe there are chemical and biological weapons in or around Iraq. They know that Saddam had them. How else could you explain the fact that the Republican Guard had received extensive training on chemical warfare and had stockpiles of BRAND NEW chemical suits and protective masks? It was because they were expecting to use them. They knew that coalition forces wouldnt use them.
People will continue to argue over this for years. But, one of these days it will be widely known that Saddam did in fact have chemical weapons.
I ask you this, if I were to give you 5000 warheads with a chemical weapon and told you to hide them somewhere in your region, how long do you think it would take for someone to find them? Now, take a country the size of Iraq, the capabilities and the money that Saddam had, and the ability of the desert to cover up ANYTHING, and tell me how long it would take someone to find them.
Besides the WMD claims, there were other just as valid reasons to go to war with Iraq. So, lets talk about the UN sanctions Saddam violated over the years and the US jets that he shot at almost everyday. Or, how about the fact that he allowed Zarqawi refuge in Iraq after he was wounded fighting coalition forces in Afghanistan. And lets not forget about the Al Queda training camps in the North.
War sucks. It sucks that we ever had to go to Iraq. It sucks that we still have young men and women there. It sucks that we will have a presence there for many years. But the fact is that Saddam was a threat to the world and to American security. We couldnt let him team with Al Queda anymore than they already had. If a terrorist organization got ahold of chemical weapons, this world would be in a world of hurt. The simple fact is, someone had to take Saddam out. America, Great Britian, Poland, Australia, and various other countries were just the ones that had enough balls to do it. And Bush just happened to be the one with the brass balls that stated the facts and led the way.
I respect the man who believed there were WMDs in Iraq and did something about it a million times more than the man who believed there were WMDs in Iraq and did nothing.
[quote]doogie wrote:
I respect the man who believed there were WMDs in Iraq and did something about it a million times more than the man who believed there were WMDs in Iraq and did nothing.[/quote]
How about the man who knew perfectly well how unlikely it was there were WMDs in Iraq but who wanted you to believe there were WMDs in Iraq?
[quote]100meters wrote:
hedo wrote:
vroom wrote:
Jerffy is clearly insane.
Why is he insane?
They are “quotes” from the oppositon making the same claim as the current administration, which this opposition now claims lied. Looks like they had the same view.
Uhmmm…are they the same claims? I don’t see any claims using definitive fact of WMD as a pretense to invade Iraq? See hedo, the lied part as we all know, were the definitive claims of wmd and al-queda ties—despite the intel, to justify invading. Let’s not even mention the whole “No nation building” either…
[/quote]
If they looked at the same evidence, which they did, then are you saying the Dems lied also. Or are you just ignoring the obvious to make a political statement.
I don’t think either lied. They all looked at the same intel and made the same recommendation. I know that would blow your bias wiring apart but try and think objectively if just for a moment.
[quote]doogie wrote:
I respect the man who believed there were WMDs in Iraq and did something about it a million times more than the man who believed there were WMDs in Iraq and did nothing.[/quote]
Doogie
You hit the nail on the head brother.
lumpy,
It’s unfortunate (but not surprising) that you didn’t read the entire article.
Go back. Read it all.
You claim that the dems didn’t “assert” that there were “definetly WMD.”
I posted plenty showing that they did indeed assert, and in some cases aggressively assert, JUST EXACTLY THAT.
Read it.
The difference, of course, is the will to do something about it. Not talk, action.
It’s sad that these same clowns who were sure there were stockpiles, are now jumping ship. Worse, they are pointing fingers and raising hell.
Don’t believe for one second that these self-same dinks aren’t being encouraged by the enemy.
Hypocrites and worse…
JeffR