• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Fight Back, Mr. President

Joined
Nov 9, 2005
Messages
2,669
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Last Tuesday, Harry Reid took to the floor of the Senate and asserted that the Bush administration had "manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions." This is a serious charge; if it were true, it might well be an indictable offense. But it is, in reality, a slander. Shouldn't the president defend his honor?



http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/317nfqkh.asp
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by KCConservative:
Last Tuesday, Harry Reid took to the floor of the Senate and asserted that the Bush administration had "manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions." This is a serious charge; if it were true, it might well be an indictable offense. But it is, in reality, a slander. Shouldn't the president defend his honor?
What do you mean "if" it were true? Have you not read DSM? Those memo's clearly show motive. Leiutenant-General Moseley's statements about trying to provoke Iraq in April of 2002 shows Bush started this war before receiving authorization from Congress (which is an impeachable offense). All the crap that came out of his and his administration's mouths about WMD's that they never found, the forged niger documents, the constantly changing reasons's why we went to war, how much more writing on the wall do you need to realize there is something wrong with this picture.

Not to mention, going to war against the objections of practically the entire world. Now we are being investigated and charged with war crimes against humanity. These are not coincidences. If there was ever a President that didn't give a damn about the citizens of his country, this is the guy. Although, impeaching this prick is a long shot because we have a pussified Congress that don't have the balls to stand up to the "Lyin' King".
 

Kandahar

Enemy Combatant
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 20, 2005
Messages
20,688
Reaction score
7,319
Location
Washington, DC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Of course George Bush deliberately misled the country. However, all of those senators knew in 2003 that the justification for war was bullshit, but they voted for it anyway. They are nearly as guilty as Bush is.
 

Billo_Really

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 6, 2005
Messages
18,930
Reaction score
1,040
Location
HBCA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Liberal
Originally posted by Kandahar:
Of course George Bush deliberately misled the country. However, all of those senators knew in 2003 that the justification for war was bullshit, but they voted for it anyway. They are nearly as guilty as Bush is.
What do you mean "nearly"? They are just as guilty. And so are we. This is all being done in our name. If we don't try to use the system to try and stop this, then we are no different than Bush.
 

python416

Active member
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
484
Reaction score
2
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I have been saying that since before the war! And it is nice to see the American public finally start to wake up to it, even if it is more than 2 years too late. I am pretty confident that one say almost all Americans will realize what pack of crap they have been sold.

I can't wait for the Libby trial cause a lot of it will come out then, I think. Even though I think Libby was just trying to smear Wilson, and my mistake outed his wife - but whatever, cause smearing Wilson because he objected to Cheney's painting of the intelligence situation should be a crime. (it is hard to write a law against smearing though - the neocons wouldn't be able to survive without their smear campaigns)

KCConservative said:
Last Tuesday, Harry Reid took to the floor of the Senate and asserted that the Bush administration had "manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions." This is a serious charge; if it were true, it might well be an indictable offense. But it is, in reality, a slander. Shouldn't the president defend his honor?



http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/317nfqkh.asp
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Why does everyone think that Congress saw the exact same intelligence that the White House saw? Or am I missing something?

Regardless, as correctly pointed out by former Senator Daschle, you always give the President the benefit of the doubt. He and his adminstration were going on every political show saying how we were in imminent danger. He has put his credibility on the line, and people are rightly questioning it, as most of what he said was not true, and there is evidence to show that there were lots of doubts about what the Bushies were saying.

How can he fight back? If he continues to assert that he did not mislead the people and there is a finding that he did, he has dug a deeper hole in attempting to continue to pull the wool over our eyes.

Awwww, and I thought that Bushie Wushie was supposed to restore honesty and integrity to the White House?
 

Stu Ghatze

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 30, 2005
Messages
531
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
aps said:
Why does everyone think that Congress saw the exact same intelligence that the White House saw? Or am I missing something?

Regardless, as correctly pointed out by former Senator Daschle, you always give the President the benefit of the doubt. He and his adminstration were going on every political show saying how we were in imminent danger. He has put his credibility on the line, and people are rightly questioning it, as most of what he said was not true, and there is evidence to show that there were lots of doubts about what the Bushies were saying.

How can he fight back? If he continues to assert that he did not mislead the people and there is a finding that he did, he has dug a deeper hole in attempting to continue to pull the wool over our eyes.

Awwww, and I thought that Bushie Wushie was supposed to restore honesty and integrity to the White House?





Keep dreaming, ..OH Bush can fight back alright & do you really believe the senate democrats were coerced into voting for the war in Iraq?

If you do YOU better think again, & THEY saw the same intelligence reports, & they drew THEIR own conclusions.

And ..MANY senate democrats, & former president Clinton ALSO gave nice little warm hearted speeches that Sadaam was a serious threat.

Not only that the senate democrats also wanted THEIR OWN RESOLUTION to show for the record how they voted, & why they voted to go to war, & their SOUND bytes, & THEIR own words are now recorded for posterior.

THe country ALSO knows as to why "some" democrats voted for the war resolution too, ..& it was for no other reason than to GRANDSTAND, & TO PRETEND that THEY are tough on terror, & support our military, ..when in fact "some" of them do not give a rats as.s about our military, & even vote AGAINST most funding for weapons systems etc!

So either the democratic party as a whole was serious about going to war with Iraq, ..OR they were nothing but a bunch of g-damn phonies "posturing" because the mainstream MAJORITY supported Bush on it, & the senate democrats were worried they might be committing political suicide IF they did not get on board.

Amazing, ..so now THIS DISINGENUINE behavior is carried forth into MORE DISINGENUINE BEHAVIOR...BY THE DEMOCRATS as an excuse to help undermine Mr. Bush's presidency!

I love it..:2razz: Why Bush made me do it, cause' he must have lied!

Clue: The majority of Americans SEE exactly what the democratic party is up to, & what they are trying to pull here; & it is about as PHONEY as a three dollar bill..No, strike that...it is even MORE phoney than what John Kerry was in the 04' campaign!:smile:
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
Stu Ghatze said:
Keep dreaming, ..OH Bush can fight back alright & do you really believe the senate democrats were coerced into voting for the war in Iraq?

If you do YOU better think again, & THEY saw the same intelligence reports, & they drew THEIR own conclusions.

And ..MANY senate democrats, & former president Clinton ALSO gave nice little warm hearted speeches that Sadaam was a serious threat.

Not only that the senate democrats also wanted THEIR OWN RESOLUTION to show for the record how they voted, & why they voted to go to war, & their SOUND bytes, & THEIR own words are now recorded for posterior.

THe country ALSO knows as to why "some" democrats voted for the war resolution too, ..& it was for no other reason than to GRANDSTAND, & TO PRETEND that THEY are tough on terror, & support our military, ..when in fact "some" of them do not give a rats as.s about our military, & even vote AGAINST most funding for weapons systems etc!

So either the democratic party as a whole was serious about going to war with Iraq, ..OR they were nothing but a bunch of g-damn phonies "posturing" because the mainstream MAJORITY supported Bush on it, & the senate democrats were worried they might be committing political suicide IF they did not get on board.

Amazing, ..so now THIS DISINGENUINE behavior is carried forth into MORE DISINGENUINE BEHAVIOR...BY THE DEMOCRATS as an excuse to help undermine Mr. Bush's presidency!

I love it..:2razz: Why Bush made me do it, cause' he must have lied!

Clue: The majority of Americans SEE exactly what the democratic party is up to, & what they are trying to pull here; & it is about as PHONEY as a three dollar bill..No, strike that...it is even MORE phoney than what John Kerry was in the 04' campaign!:smile:
LOL Stu. You clearly are the one that is dreaming here. All your smiley faces ain't fooling me into thinking that you're not upset by Bush's low approval rating and the questioning of his integrity. Sure people don't think too much of the democrats right now, but I think it's worse for a president to be as unpopular as Bush is right now.
 

Old and wise

Active member
Joined
Aug 28, 2005
Messages
310
Reaction score
0
Location
New England
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
KCConservative said:
Last Tuesday, Harry Reid took to the floor of the Senate and asserted that the Bush administration had "manufactured and manipulated intelligence in order to sell the war in Iraq and attempted to destroy those who dared to challenge its actions." This is a serious charge; if it were true, it might well be an indictable offense. But it is, in reality, a slander. Shouldn't the president defend his honor?



http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/006/317nfqkh.asp
First off, the President has no honor.

Second, he couldn't fight his way out of a paper bag. He deserted from the National Guard and never learned how to fight. Remember?:rofl
 

python416

Active member
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
484
Reaction score
2
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Stu Ghatze said:
Keep dreaming, ..OH Bush can fight back alright & do you really believe the senate democrats were coerced into voting for the war in Iraq?

If you do YOU better think again, & THEY saw the same intelligence reports, & they drew THEIR own conclusions.

And ..MANY senate democrats, & former president Clinton ALSO gave nice little warm hearted speeches that Sadaam was a serious threat.

Not only that the senate democrats also wanted THEIR OWN RESOLUTION to show for the record how they voted, & why they voted to go to war, & their SOUND bytes, & THEIR own words are now recorded for posterior.

THe country ALSO knows as to why "some" democrats voted for the war resolution too, ..& it was for no other reason than to GRANDSTAND, & TO PRETEND that THEY are tough on terror, & support our military, ..when in fact "some" of them do not give a rats as.s about our military, & even vote AGAINST most funding for weapons systems etc!

So either the democratic party as a whole was serious about going to war with Iraq, ..OR they were nothing but a bunch of g-damn phonies "posturing" because the mainstream MAJORITY supported Bush on it, & the senate democrats were worried they might be committing political suicide IF they did not get on board.

Amazing, ..so now THIS DISINGENUINE behavior is carried forth into MORE DISINGENUINE BEHAVIOR...BY THE DEMOCRATS as an excuse to help undermine Mr. Bush's presidency!

I love it..:2razz: Why Bush made me do it, cause' he must have lied!

Clue: The majority of Americans SEE exactly what the democratic party is up to, & what they are trying to pull here; & it is about as PHONEY as a three dollar bill..No, strike that...it is even MORE phoney than what John Kerry was in the 04' campaign!:smile:
Same old Stu, how ya doing?

Dems voted for the war for a few reasons:

1) they were supporting the president in unity
2) without that vote, the diplomatic process would haev no chance, because there was no stick to wave at Saddam
3) BECAUSE THE NEOCONS REMOVED ALL CONTRARIAN EVIDENCE FROM THE PRESENTATIONS TO THE SENATE

And, I know these type of argument just go in one ear and out the other with most of you neocon fans, but there is a difference between Clinton saying that Saddam was a threat and Bush walking away from diplomacy to rush to war.
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,777
Reaction score
3,417
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
There is ONLY ONE President of the United States.....and as much as he has avoided responsibility for past mistakes, he will eventually be forced to deal with the inevitable repurcussions of a failed policy. I think we are seeing the first stages of what will become a relatively nasty downfall , not only of respect/ratings....but possibly of position. As much as those who support Mr. Bush like to ignore what seems obvious to those who do not....he has not been a very inspiring leader of the free world. In fact....soon we will not be able to Lead the Free World at all, if only because you cannot lead out of fear. We have gone from a respected and admired counrty....to a feared and (in many cases) loathed country in less than a decade, and while this may have started in some measure before Bush took office.....George W. Bush has thrown away half the power of our country.....the power of negotiation, and with it a very useful tool.
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Stu Ghatze said:
Clue: The majority of Americans SEE exactly what the democratic party is up to, & what they are trying to pull here; & it is about as PHONEY as a three dollar bill.
What is you source for this statistic?

python416 said:
3) BECAUSE THE NEOCONS REMOVED ALL CONTRARIAN EVIDENCE FROM THE PRESENTATIONS TO THE SENATE
Why do you say this?
 

ShullsM

Member
Joined
Oct 17, 2005
Messages
89
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
python416 said:
I have been saying that since before the war! And it is nice to see the American public finally start to wake up to it, even if it is more than 2 years too late. I am pretty confident that one say almost all Americans will realize what pack of crap they have been sold.

I can't wait for the Libby trial cause a lot of it will come out then, I think. Even though I think Libby was just trying to smear Wilson, and my mistake outed his wife - but whatever, cause smearing Wilson because he objected to Cheney's painting of the intelligence situation should be a crime. (it is hard to write a law against smearing though - the neocons wouldn't be able to survive without their smear campaigns)
I hope you are right about the Libby trial, because that may be the last chance for hard core, mainstream evidence to come out.
 

python416

Active member
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
484
Reaction score
2
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Simon W. Moon said:
What is you source for this statistic?


Why do you say this?
What do you mean? Do you think the cases made to the UN and the Senate included things like "there is serious doubt as to if Saddam was buying Uranium from Niger"? Obviously not. Why not? Because they were being snake oil sales man. I doubt it would happen again like that, since the American public probably won't fall for it again.
 

python416

Active member
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
484
Reaction score
2
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
ShullsM said:
I hope you are right about the Libby trial, because that may be the last chance for hard core, mainstream evidence to come out.
Well the Libby trail is a good place for it to start, but I believe that the prewar runup, the 911 connection, and the pre-911 intel situations are going to be what this administration is remembered for for decades. It will just take a little time. They had the media on their side for a while, but that is starting to slip away.

Ohh yeah, the deficit they are leaving for American generations to come, and the education deficiency, and the inaction on transistion to a non-petro based economy, will also be in the history books for this bunch.

I think a good title for him would be: "The 'Wasted Opportunity' President"
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
python416 said:
What do you mean? Do you think the cases made to the UN and the Senate included things like "there is serious doubt as to if Saddam was buying Uranium from Niger"? Obviously not. Why not?
What I think is largely, if not entirely, irrelevant.

What evidence do you have to support the allegation that "THE NEOCONS REMOVED ALL CONTRARIAN EVIDENCE FROM THE PRESENTATIONS TO THE SENATE?"
 

python416

Active member
Joined
Aug 29, 2005
Messages
484
Reaction score
2
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Simon W. Moon said:
What I think is largely, if not entirely, irrelevant.

What evidence do you have to support the allegation that "THE NEOCONS REMOVED ALL CONTRARIAN EVIDENCE FROM THE PRESENTATIONS TO THE SENATE?"
Quote me one peice of contrarian evidence cited by anyone in the administration - EVER. All they have pushed for is war since before they were in power. With Senators saying that they were mislead, and an administration that has a history of misleading, and NO HISTORY of offering or acknowledging anything that doesn't support war, what don't you understand?
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
aps said:
Why does everyone think that Congress saw the exact same intelligence that the White House saw? Or am I missing something?
After 9/11 Bush got it setup so he only had to show classified info to 8 hand picked members of Congress. It's completely conceivable the majority didn't get to see the whole picture that is just now being revealed.
 

aps

Passionate
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 25, 2005
Messages
15,675
Reaction score
2,979
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
scottyz said:
After 9/11 Bush got it setup so he only had to show classified info to 8 hand picked members of Congress. It's completely conceivable the majority didn't get to see the whole picture that is just now being revealed.
Ooooh, interesting. Who were the 8 picked?
 

scottyz

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
1,575
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Moderate
aps said:
Ooooh, interesting. Who were the 8 picked?
Speaker of the House, House Minority Leader, Senate Majority and Minority Leaders, and the Chairs and Ranking Members of the Intelligence Committees in the House and Senate

I'm sure Bush still gets to withhold info even from them.
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
python416 said:
With Senators saying that they were mislead ...
When and where did which senators say this?

python416 said:
... what don't you understand?
I don't understand what your specific evidence for saying "the neocons removed all contrarian evidence from the presentations to the senate" actually consists of.
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
scottyz said:
After 9/11 Bush got it setup so he only had to show classified info to 8 hand picked members of Congress. It's completely conceivable the majority didn't get to see the whole picture that is just now being revealed.
A link please........aw never mind.....:roll:
 

Navy Pride

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 11, 2005
Messages
39,883
Reaction score
3,070
Location
Pacific NW
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
scottyz said:
Speaker of the House, House Minority Leader, Senate Majority and Minority Leaders, and the Chairs and Ranking Members of the Intelligence Committees in the House and Senate

I'm sure Bush still gets to withhold info even from them.
Your to much man.............:roll:
 

Simon W. Moon

Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 20, 2005
Messages
22,807
Reaction score
8,096
Location
Fayettenam
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Navy Pride said:
A link please........aw never mind.....:roll:
I suspect he's talking about this:

Bush Edict on Briefings Irks Hill
White House Stems Information Flow
By Dana Milbank and Peter Slevin
Washington Post Staff Writers
Wednesday, October 10, 2001; Page A01


A dispute over the Bush administration's control of information since the Sept. 11 terrorist strikes erupted into an angry exchange between the White House and Congress yesterday after President Bush moved to restrict intelligence shared with lawmakers.

Members from both parties objected strongly to Bush's highly unusual step of ordering that briefings with sensitive information be limited to eight of the 535 members of Congress.

"To put out a public document telling the world he doesn't trust the Congress and we leak everything, I'm not sure that helps develop unanimity and comradeship."
-- Sen. Chuck Hagel (R-Neb.)

"We have to have classified briefings if we're going to do our oversight role."
--Carl Levin (D-Mich.)

"I want Congress to hear loud and clear, it is unacceptable behavior to leak classified information when we have troops at risk."
--GWB
But, I don't think it means what he thinks it means.
 
Top Bottom