• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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.

PROOF Bush LIED about Iraq!

I like that your a Dualist poster. They wanted to get rid of Saddam then, now they want to defend Saddam now. It's circumstantial evidence that they have changed thier politics since a Republican has came into office. And now they are blaming Bush of everything they wanted to do to Saddam. But what is your point?
 
I'm surprized this thread hasn't merged with the new one.
 
the public thinks he misled them, so this thread doesn't really matter much anymore. i've been enjoying watching his admin flail over the past few weeks.
 
ban.the.electoral.college said:
the public thinks he misled them, so this thread doesn't really matter much anymore. i've been enjoying watching his admin flail over the past few weeks.
Click to expand...

O god your back for another beating. :lol:
 
stsburns said:
I have to warn you "Prepare to gasp!"

Where's your big guns now? :mrgreen:
Click to expand...

So?

**** Clinton, **** Bush, **** Kerry.

So?
 

Attachments

  • flt93d.webp
    44.9 KB · Views: 7
ban.the.electoral.college said:
the public thinks he misled them, so this thread doesn't really matter much anymore. i've been enjoying watching his admin flail over the past few weeks.
Click to expand...

Then SKILMATIC wrote:
O god your back for another beating.
Click to expand...

:rofl O man, you're too much dude.:2razz:
 
kal-el said:
Then SKILMATIC wrote:


:rofl O man, you're too much dude.:2razz:
Click to expand...

I know what can I say? I am just so entertaining :lol:
 
Originally posted by SKILMATIC:
I know what can I say? I am just so entertaining
Click to expand...
That goes without saying.
 
Originally posted by SKILMATIC:
O god your back for another beating.
Click to expand...
He's not the one who got whupped! He backed up everything he stated with facts and logic.
 
Billo_Really said:
He's not the one who got whupped! He backed up everything he stated with facts and logic.
Click to expand...

Really?

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2005/11/16/122915.shtml

Can you say you just got insurmountable wooped by a can of woopass to yours truly by none other than SKILMATIC the Great? :rofl

Please dont cry too much. I would hope you much like ban electoral can be men about this and just admit you're wrong.
 

O man, I can't believe someone of your stature would cling to such a flagrant and outright lie, masqearding as a proper web site.:lol: Dude, there's no truth whatsoever in that link, because if there was, the speculation would be over, and you war-mongers would be correct.

And who the hell is newsmax, anyways?
 
I've read this some time ago and still are waiting for the official Pentagon report, which hasn't came. And judging from your anxiety on this issue, neither have you.
 
If you think the President deliberately lied the nation into war then you must also believe the then director of the CIA George Tenent (a Clinton appointee) did the same in the 2002 National Intelligence Estimate (NIE) on Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs.

A reporter asked the question "Do you believe DCI George Tenet, who was appointed by Clinton, intentionally falsified any of the evidence in his 2002 NIE that Iraq had WMDs and was reconstituting its nuclear program?" to several lawmakers.

Amazingly Democrats avoided the question with the exception of Joseph Lieberman. All Republicans gave a straight answer. Minority leader Senator Harry Reid of Nevada said "I don’t know George Tenet, what he did or didn’t do." What???? He does not know who George is? Did he honestly mean that or was he tap dancing?

http://www.humaneventsonline.com/article.php?id=10314

You know Washington is messed up when the Democrats turn their back's on a Clinton appointee while the Republicans defend him. And why did so many of them vote on the authorization of force without even reading the NIE. That's a pretty important vote to cast, I would of hoped that they had done some research before voting.
 
Bush didn't lie. He focused on what the American people would rally behind. It's that simple. He knew what Presidents before him knew and what many politicians of both parties are aware of. Our security depends on a changed Middle East and whatever got us there...got us there.

I keep telling you people that your focus on WMD as the definition for a threat is foolish. Worrying about "Bush lies" and concrete evidence of WMD while ignoring the civilization behind Islamic extremism, only encourages WMD as a future threat. Bush knows this, because he receives intel from the CIA, the military, and the intel of other nations. The fact is, that there have been at least four presidents before him that knew all of this too, but ignored it. One was even the head of the CIA for a while. We can no longer wait for the Middle East to show us "proof" of what is to come. This civilization is determined to hate us and their extremists are determined to wage war upon us no matter what we do.

Do you think the "War on Terror" is going away in 2008? Future administrations will have to deal with it, because extremists do not quit and ignoring them as we did through the 90's while they carried out "successful" attacks on the "Great Satan" only encourages the futureless masses in the Middle East to take up arms and back a winner. Terrorist organizations have a harder time recruiting when they are on the losing side.
 
Last edited:

I believe that George Tenet provided the evidence that Bush wanted so he could wage this war. My belief is that Tenet gave less probative value to the dissents than to the evidence that supported the claim that there were WMDs. But if you notice, ANAV, if Tenet provided such horrible intelligence, why on earth did the president award him with the highest civilian award? Doesn't make sense to me.

I think it's sad of you to assume that just because Clinton appointed Tenet that all the democrats should be defending him.

I agree that Congress failed in its job to thoroughly read the NIE report. However, Congress gave the president the authority to wage war. The president was aware of the NIE report and still waged war. See below. A former senator describes what he knew before the invasion. It's disturbing.

[The Intelligence] community produced a classified NIE.

There were troubling aspects to this 90-page document. While slanted toward the conclusion that Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction stored or produced at 550 sites, it contained vigorous dissents on key parts of the information, especially by the departments of State and Energy. Particular skepticism was raised about aluminum tubes that were offered as evidence Iraq was reconstituting its nuclear program. As to Hussein's will to use whatever weapons he might have, the estimate indicated he would not do so unless he was first attacked. . . .

The American people needed to know these reservations, and I requested that an unclassified, public version of the NIE be prepared. On Oct. 4, Tenet presented a 25-page document titled "Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction Programs." It represented an unqualified case that Hussein possessed them, avoided a discussion of whether he had the will to use them and omitted the dissenting opinions contained in the classified version. Its conclusions, such as "If Baghdad acquired sufficient weapons-grade fissile material from abroad, it could make a nuclear weapon within a year," underscored the White House's claim that exactly such material was being provided from Africa to Iraq.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/11/18/AR2005111802397.html
 
Here is a quote from the attached link above;

Both the Senate Intelligence Committee and the presidential Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of Mass Destruction, which investigated the CIA’s pre-war claims about Iraq, concluded that the CIA did not distort intelligence for political reasons, but had simply made the wrong conclusions.

Eight Republicans and seven Democrats sit on Senate Intelligence Committee. The findings clearing state that the intelligence was not distorted for political reasons. So the issue as to weather Bush influenced the intelligence has been addressed and resolved.

If there was questionable content in the report and the lawmakers failed to read it but voted for the authorization of power, then how is that misleading them? And what did they thinking when they voted? "Just because we have overwhelming voted the use of force, we don't mean it?" The fact is they DID authorize it.

My bit about the Democrats not sticking up for Tenent while the Republicans are was to just illustrate how two faced both parties can be.
 
Bush lied by making Iraq out to be some big threat. And they weren't. His Administration claimed Hussein had WMD's and they "knew where they were". That's a lie. They did not know where they were. Bush spoke of "mushroom clouds" if we didn't do anything, which was total bullshit. He talked about the "uranium tubes" as evidence when he was told nine months before that they weren't, but he decided to run with it anyway. Iraq was not a threat to anyone. However, you wouldn't get that listening to him.

He has done more damage to this country than al qaida ever would. He has increased terrorism in the world and made this planet less safe. If that isn't enough, he attacked a country that hadn't done anything to us. Iraq is our scapegoat!

He made it seem like he was acting in concert with UN Resolutions when in fact he was acting unilaterally on his own. DSM proves this point out.

The Congressional vote was a mute point because Bush had already started the war nine months before. And that, is an impeachable offence.
 

Alright...here I go...

Iraq is a part of a bigger picture and mushroom clouds are a part of that. You know this...you are just content with bashing mundane details and pretending to be ignorant to the issues, because doing otherwise means that you have to question your convictions. There is nothing to question here....dealing with a civilization where millions want you dead, is not the same as Gandhi facing the British Empire.

Your second paragraph is utter bull ****. Terrorism has not increased. Don't fall victim to some intel officials who are more concerned with saving their own asses than reporting truths. It is always safer to report failures and negative scenarios than to report complete truths and be wrong. I've seen enough of this kind of thing over the last decade to know the difference between sincere intel and self preservation. You mistake some desperate attempts by Al-Queda to show the Muslim world that they are still a formiddable force by slaughtering other Muslims in Indonesia and Jordan as an increase in strength. You forget that their targets used to be on U.S. military personel, ships, buildings, and bases. Now they are reduced to slaughtering their own people for revenge. Al-Queda is wrecked. Their funds are depleted or frozen. No country will harbor them, because they have Afghanistan and Iraq to remind them of the consequences. The insurgency into Iraq is no longer a serious threat, because the good majority of the fighters inside Iraq are local Sunni. The "martyrs" that were crossing over from Syria are no longer in a hurry to see their god in hell. Our job their is almost complete. Diplomacy is what is mostly left for us. An extremist group (forget the name off hand) in Ethiopia are being destroyed right now by East Coast Marines. This group launches its terror attacks into Sudan by the way. The Phillipine government is acting with Far East Marines based on Okinawa and chasing down Islamic terror groups in the Phillipine jungles. Currently their is a Marine/CIA consultation inside Indonesia working out some future endeavors against their extremist groups and yes...Al-Queda has a minor base of operations. England is cracking down hard on their Islamic Mullahs. Hate speech is no longer a luxury they have. Australia has, so far, been the only nation that has taken the drastic steps necessary to force their Mullahs to assimilate or leave. (Our country will, of course, be the last ones to do the right thing for our security because we recognize their right to hate and spew venom, because we are stupid.) Russia, despite their ties to Iran for business purposes, are cracking down in Checnya. China is deeply concerned about their western Islamic province. Syria is imprisoning hundreds of reformist for speaking out about positive change within their borders towards a more democratic government. The vast majority of Iranians do not want their current government and do not adhere to the Mullahs sense of Islamic rule. Jordan has finally publicly condemned Al-Queda and is chasing extremist out of their country (It took an Al-Queda attack to open their eyes to what their "martyrs" really are). With every new terrorist attack, more Muslim eyes are opened.

The Muslim world is desperate for answers, but they are not stupid. They see what being a part of a terror group will do to their personal safety. Your continued focus on Iraq is blinding you to what is actually happening all over the world. There have been attacks that have not taken place on our soil because of the CIA and the FBI. Some of this is being brought out in the news currently. There have been captures. Even with Iraq you refuse to see what great things are happening with their new government. And there is nothing I can say to make you see it. I've tried.

...and by the way...the war started long before nine months. Don't be naive. Your government and military has plans for all kinds of things. That's how much your security matters.
 
Last edited:
Billo_Really said:
Bush lied by making Iraq out to be some big threat. And they weren't. His Administration claimed Hussein had WMD's and they "knew where they were". That's a lie.

And that, is an impeachable offence.
Click to expand...

:spin:

The only lies are the lies you keep telling about Bush telling lies. :lol:

We knew where the WMD were. That isnt a lie. That's fact. Because they had been moved by the time we arrived doesn't make it a lie. That makes you the liar, doesn't it?

Keep us posted on that impeachment, mmkay?
 
The day you find those WMD's will be the day I admit I was mistaken. Until then, embrace the horror!

Also, starting a war prior to approvel from Congress is an impeachable offence. You omitted a line that was the premise of that statement. Was that by design?
 

Explain for us how "knowing where they are" and them not being there once we arrives constitutes a lie. Until you can do that, embrace your own horror. They were obviously moved.

I just asked how the impeachment was coming. I remember a petition thread that died about 60 pages back. Maybe you could resurrect that and have him impeached in a couple of weeks. :roll:
 
My statement was in concert with the point of this thread.

If you would spend 1/10th of the time trying to understand my point than you are telling me your perspective on what you think my point is, we would both be better off because of it. You keep trying to tell me my motivation or what I am thinking. Although you get points for consistancy, you are consistantly wrong. If you want to know why I did something, ask, and I will tell you. However, if you would rather just keep guessing because it is more convenient to do so, there is nothing I can do to stop you.

Do you really think al qaida exists? Now, after you're done rolling your eyes, I will ask you a question. The latter was more of a rhetorical statement. Want I want to know, and you should know something about this, given all the terrorist groups in the world, do you really believe they are all acting as a unified force against the United States?
 
Originally posted by KCConservative
Explain for us how "knowing where they are" and them not being there once we arrives constitutes a lie. Until you can do that, embrace your own horror. They were obviously moved.
Click to expand...
Maybe you should brush up on English 101. Your comprehension skills are a little lacking. As I stated before, I will answer this question when you find the WMD's.

Originally posted by KCConservative
I just asked how the impeachment was coming. I remember a petition thread that died about 60 pages back. Maybe you could resurrect that and have him impeached in a couple of weeks.
Click to expand...
OK KC, I guess I took your "impeachment" comment the wrong way. I apologize.
 

Hell no. Of course not. As super group as Al-Queda was, they could not rally the "martyrs" of the world under one ideal. However, Al-Queda was more wide spread than people think.

Our intel places some Islamic groups inside the Middle East with Al-Queda, because since Iraq began, they have dissapeared or dissipated into Al-Queda to be a part of the insurgency. Terror groups in other countries have joined forces with Al-Queda. An example of this would be the Bali bombings. The Indonesian Government has looked the other way with regards to their extremist problems, because they didn't wish to antagonize them. There are two seperate groups inside Indonesia. There is the home grown Islamic group and Al-Queda has a base of operations there. The Bali bombings was a collaberation of the two and it gave the fraction of their government the excuse they have been waiting for. In other countries there has been reports that Al-Queda has local influence.

As for your first question (rhetorical statement)...it's actually a good question. They do not exist as they once did. Al-Queda, while still being some what organized, is fractured and splintered. They still have influence upon others that wish to find favor with God (used by Bin Laden), they mostly serve as an idea for other terror groups that are determined to achieve their heights of success. This is why we must continue our efforts all over the world while still aggressively (diplomatically) persuing and encouraging change in the Middle East.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…