KCConservative
Banned
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2005
- Messages
- 2,669
- Reaction score
- 0
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Of course. It's a free country and a free forum. For once, I want someone to do something other than say he lied and actually make a logical case for it. Until then, it's the normal Bush bashing hate rhetoric.Simon W. Moon said:Your thread, your rules. So I ask, may conservatives participate as well?
Simon W. Moon said:The most essential element that was necessary was the suspension of disbelief in the undeterrability of Hussein, that he was a 'madman'. Despite the analysis of Dr. Rice ("national obliteration") and the historical incidences (James Baker- "resounding silence" in the Iraqi desert) in which Hussein had been shown to be well deterred from attacking the US w/ non-conventional weapons, and despite the best information available at the time from the US intelligence community, ( the probability of Hussein initiating an attack in the foreseeable future is low ), Team Bush repeatedly sold the idea that an attack from Hussein was something that would happen sooner than later. They said that we could not wait lest there be a mushroom cloud over major metropolitan area (despite the fact that the best information available said that Hussein did not have this capacity ). According to Team Bush Hussein was mongongo monkey nuts with hatred for the US and was willing to sacrifice his own life, livelihood and nation to initiate an attack in the immediate future.
None of this was supported by the best information available at the time.
Without even having to address the issues of Hussein's biological and chemical weapons, it can be seen the idea that Hussein represented a threat to the US were not supported by the best information available at the time.
Without a threat to the US, there was not reason enough to risk American lives on the scale that we have. According to one senior official, Hussein's "criminal treatment of the Iraqi people" was not enough to warrant the major invasion of Iraq.
These are just few examples of how the case for the invasion of Iraq depended on malinfo as opposed to the "best information available at the time."
Then there's the whole issue of how could so many people in the world who had only Google to go by come up with more accurate answers than Team Bush?
It's his portrayal of what he believes the country's military should be...mixedmedia said:Iriemon,
I'm sorry to break the mood here, but I have been puzzled, peering closely at your avatar every time I see it and I just have to ask. What the hell is that thing?
cnredd said:It's his portrayal of what he believes the country's military should be...
a harmless little kitten that can hardly defend itself...
Trajan Octavian Titus said:GOD I HATE FUQING LIERS!!!:
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, February 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, February 17, 1998
"We must stop Saddam from ever again jeopardizing the stability and security of his neighbors with weapons of mass destruction." - Madeline Albright, February 1, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, February 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. - (D) Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, others, October 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), December 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton’s Secretary of State, November 10, 1999
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), September 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, September 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, September 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), September 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), October 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), October 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), October 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), December 8, 2002
“Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States.” -Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) September 4, 2002
“If we wait for the [Iraq] danger to become clear, it could be too late.” -Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del) September 4, 2002
“Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations.” -Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) February 5, 2003
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), January 23. 2003
:mrgreen:
aps said:Trajan, what I find rather sad is that you don't seem to understand this issue. No one is saying that others did NOT believe that Saddam Hussein had WMDs. The point is that the Bushies knew there were caveats about whether he had WMDs and/or whether he was reconstituting WMDs and whether there was a connection between Saddam Hussein and Iraq and failed to provide us with that intelligence (or failed to even recognize that there were caveats).
So provide 10 to 20 more quotes saying that everyone believed that Saddam had WMDs if that makes you feel better. LOL
mixedmedia said:Iriemon,
I'm sorry to break the mood here, but I have been puzzled, peering closely at your avatar every time I see it and I just have to ask. What the hell is that thing?
cnredd said:It's his portrayal of what he believes the country's military should be...
a harmless little kitten that can hardly defend itself...
Iriemon said:Ha ha.
Maybe it would be better if I used an avatar with some tough guy and guns or something, and sit at my computer bitching about people not supporting the Iraq war while sitting on my ass typing posts instead of joining the army to help fight the war I support.
alphieb said:The war on Iraq is simply "OPERATION DESERT STORM THE SEQUEL" end of story!
alphieb said:What are you doing?
Iriemon said:From what I have read here, most Bush apologists claim it is simply "WORLD WAR II THE SEQUEL".
Iriemon said:Sitting on my ass writing posts bitching about the Iraq war.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?