Obama one of the Greats!

Thing1 said:
Bush said he was the decider. There is nothing in the resolution mandating force, specifying invasion, setting parameters for invasion, etc. There is nothing at all in the resolution making a) force inevitable, or b) making invasion inevitable.

Someone had to actually make a decision to a) use force, and b) invade Iraq. Who is the person who actually made that decision?

LOL
Click to expand...

Show us what the representatives in congress said about their vote not being for an invasion after Bush invaded Iraq.
 
Wise Old Man said:
Why do you think Bush gave a shit about Saddam when there are so many muderous dictators in the world? You're gonna have to step it up a notch. I'm not here to help the helpless.
Click to expand...

Lol, I can tell you're having trouble following this thread. This country propped up Saddam for years, you can't deny that.
 
christiefan915 said:
Cite where the Dems in the Clinton administration "voted" for an invasion. That is your post I was answering.
Click to expand...

I don't have to because that was before 9/11 and before policy change. I can show you where Dems voted for the invasion in 2003. You're dishonest and have no integrity.
 
Wise Old Man said:
I don't have to because that was before 9/11 and before policy change. I can show you where Dems voted for the invasion in 2003. You're dishonest and have no integrity.
Click to expand...

Ad homs = losing the argument.

I never denied Dems voted for the resolution in 2003. Carry on with your fantasy that I did.
 
Wise Old Man said:
LOL. I probably pay more in taxes than you make every year. You're a phoney and a dumb loser and we both know it.
Click to expand...

<yawn> If only you rabid righties could insult with a little more finesse, your posts would at least be interesting. Still hackish and wrong on the facts, though.
 
christiefan915 said:
You're forgetting something: "Whereas Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States..." and

"Whereas Iraq's demonstrated capability and willingness to use weapons of mass destruction, the risk that the current Iraqi regime will either employ those weapons to launch a surprise attack against the United States or its Armed Forces or provide them to international terrorists who would do so, and the extreme magnitude of harm that would result to the United States and its citizens from such an attack, combine to justify action by the United States to defend itself;..."

The biggest lies of all that bush counted on to get support for his debacle.
Click to expand...

christiefan915 said:
Believe me, I know every detail. That is not the reason bush gave for the invasion. He sold it to gullible Americans that Iraq was a threat and that we were in danger of being attacked by WMD.

“There’s no question that Iraq was a threat to the people of the United States.”
• White House spokeswoman Claire Buchan, 8/26/03

“We ended the threat from Saddam Hussein’s weapons of mass destruction.”
• President Bush, 7/17/03


Iraq was “the most dangerous threat of our time.”
• White House spokesman Scott McClellan, 7/17/03


“Saddam Hussein is no longer a threat to the United States because we removed him, but he was a threat…He was a threat. He’s not a threat now.”
• President Bush, 7/2/03


“Absolutely.”
• White House spokesman Ari Fleischer answering whether Iraq was an “imminent threat,” 5/7/03


“We gave our word that the threat from Iraq would be ended.”
• President Bush 4/24/03


“The threat posed by Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction will be removed.”
• Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, 3/25/03
Click to expand...

Cherry picking your quotes again....thats a form a lying, you know....
Maybe you help separate the truth tellers from the liars....

Democrats whine before Bush is elected....

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 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, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 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), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

Democrats whine after GB Bush is elected....

Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"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 th! e means of delivering them." -- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, Sept. 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, Sept. 23, 2002
--------------------------------------

Before the Resolution vote and before the war.
So whats changed ?....Democrat whining was undeniably consistant....

Saddam was a danger to peace
Saddam had WMD (we have no doubt) (we KNOW)
Saddam will use his weapons of mass distruction
Saddam has biological weapons
Saddam has chemical weapons
Saddam is a threat to countries in the region

"to take necessary actions" ?.....1998.....
Military force in ANY form against a sovereign country constitutes an act of war.....Democrats urged Clinton to attack Iraq as far back as 1998.....
The tactics are irrelevant.....any attack is an act of war.
 
Last edited:
bravo said:
Cherry picking your quotes again....thats a form a lying, you know....
Maybe you help separate the truth tellers from the liars....

Democrats whine before Bush is elected....

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." --Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 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, signed by: -- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 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), Dec. 16, 1998

"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." -- Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

Democrats whine after GB Bush is elected....

Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"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 th! e means of delivering them." -- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, Sept. 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, Sept. 23, 2002
--------------------------------------

Before the Resolution vote and before the war.
So whats changed ?....Democrat whining was undeniably consistant....

Saddam was a danger to peace
Saddam had WMD (we have no doubt) (we KNOW)
Saddam will use his weapons of mass distruction
Saddam has biological weapons
Saddam has chemical weapons
Saddam is a threat to countries in the region

"to take necessary actions" ?.....1998.....
Military force in ANY form against a sovereign country constitutes an act of war.....Democrats urged Clinton to attack Iraq as far back as 1998.....
The tactics are irrelevant.....any attack is an act of war.
Click to expand...

YOU are lecturing ME about cherry-picking? ROTFL.

I've criticized Dem senators and congressmen, Presidents Obama and Clinton, other Dem politicians and all liberals who don't check facts and do research.

Whereas you haven't once removed your blinders and acknowledged that all was not as we were told about the reasons for invading Iraq.

Tell me, how do you guys do that? I'm serious, how can you ignore facts and evidence when they're in your face? Somewhere inside you should have a little voice nagging you when information just doesn't add up, but it seems like self-deception trumps all.
 
christiefan915 said:
YOU are lecturing ME about cherry-picking? ROTFL.

I've criticized Dem senators and congressmen, Presidents Obama and Clinton, other Dem politicians and all liberals who don't check facts and do research.

Whereas you haven't once removed your blinders and acknowledged that all was not as we were told about the reasons for invading Iraq.

Tell me, how do you guys do that? I'm serious, how can you ignore facts and evidence when they're in your face? Somewhere inside you should have a little voice nagging you when information just doesn't add up, but it seems like self-deception trumps all.
Click to expand...

If you want to lie yourself, that's your right. Just don't expect rational thinking people to buy it.
 
christiefan915 said:
YOU are lecturing ME about cherry-picking? ROTFL.

I've criticized Dem senators and congressmen, Presidents Obama and Clinton, other Dem politicians and all liberals who don't check facts and do research.

Whereas you haven't once removed your blinders and acknowledged that all was not as we were told about the reasons for invading Iraq.

Tell me, how do you guys do that? I'm serious, how can you ignore facts and evidence when they're in your face? Somewhere inside you should have a little voice nagging you when information just doesn't add up, but it seems like self-deception trumps all.
Click to expand...

I didn't cherry pick a thing....the facts show the D's were whining about Saddam and WMD long long before Bush appeared on the scene....
Should we ignore the facts ?...Bush didn't fool any one about Saddam, he wasn't even in the picture and D's were calling for Clinton to attack him....
Bitch all you want, but don't blame Bush for a war that D's were demanding before he was elected....he just finally had the balls to do what they were asking for for
years and now hes vilified for it....
Certainly Bush didn't have to be badgered into removing Saddam (another Clinton/Democrat policy).....he wanted to remove him....and he made that call
long before he asked the Congress to approve it.....those are the facts and timeline......and thats what the hell this entire disagreement is about....

Thing is obcessed with the single word "invasion" and insists on rearranging the chronology to fit her view that the entire war was the fault of Bush and Bush only....obviously thats just not true....he just finally decided that enough was enough and did what everyone was begging for for years....especially the Democrats....the quotes absolutely prove that....
AND, Bush asked Congress for consent....without consent, there is no war....

If its your contention that those Democrats lied about the danger of Saddam and WMD, starting in the mid-90's, that your thing....
I would rather think they believed what they were saying and Bush believed it, and the NIE's given to the Pres. and the Congress certainly suggessed he was
a danger and possessed WMD.......even though afterwards we found out he didn't have them, NOBODY WAS LYING and that is also my point...they believed it.

Its you Dems trying to rewrite history to damage and disgrace Bush as much as you can....

heres Clinton in 1998
"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, Feb. 4, 1998

Was he lying to the nation then ?
 
Last edited:
bravo said:
I didn't cherry pick a thing....the facts show the D's were whining about Saddam and WMD long long before Bush appeared on the scene....
Should we ignore the facts...Bush didn't fool any one about Saddam, he wasn't even in the picture and D's were calling for Clinton to attack him....
Bitch all you want, but don't blame Bush for a war that D's were demanding before he was elected....he just finally had the balls to do what they were asking for for
years and now hes vilified for it....
Certainly Bush didn't have to be badgered into removing Bush (another Clinton/Democrat policy).....he wanted to remove him, too....and he made that call
long before he asked the Congress to approve it.....those are the facts and timeline......and thats what the hell this entire disagreement is about....

Thing insists on rearranging the chronology to fit her view that the entire war was the fault of Bush and Bush only....obviously thats not true....he just finally decided
that enough was enough and did what everyone was begging for for years....especially the Democrats....the quotes absolutely prove that....
AND Bush asked Congress for consent....without consent, there is no war....

If its your contention that those Democrats lied about the danger of Saddam and WMD, that your thing....
I would rather think they believed what they were saying and Bush believed it, and the NIE's given to the Pres. and the Congress certainly suggessed he was
a danger and possessed WMD.......even though afterwards we found out he didn't have, NOBODY WAS LYING and that is also my point....

Its you Dems trying to rewrite history to damage Bush as much as you can....heres Clinton in 1998
""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, Feb. 4, 1998

Was he lying to the nation then ?
Click to expand...

Well, you probably didn't notice, but the sanctions & other measures taken by the Clinton admin worked. There were no WMD's after America invaded in 2003.
 
Thing1 said:
Well, you probably didn't notice, but the sanctions & other measures taken by the Clinton admin worked. There were no WMD's after America invaded in 2003.
Click to expand...

Really....? Then it was only these Dem's lying their asses off in 2001 and 2002....and then voting for war in October 2002.....I see...
Guess they didn't notice it either, Ms. Fullofcrap.

Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." Letter to President Bush, Signed by: -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), and others, Dec 5, 2001

"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 th! e means of delivering them." -- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." -- Al Gore, Sept. 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, Sept. 23, 2002

No one denys there were no WMD's after America invaded in 2003.....thats irrelevant
Its what was beleived before the war, by R's and D's alike thats the point.
 
Last edited:
Doesn't change the fact that none of those guys called for invasion, and that sanctions did work - there were no WMD's.

If Bush hadn't recklessly rushed us into war, inspectors could have determined that without the massive loss of life & near 10-year commitment from our military.
 
Thing1 said:
The Dems only voted to give Bush the authority to use force if HE chose to do so.

There was no vote to invade. Bush and Bush alone made that decision. You're playing word games, not me.

It's pathetic. All of you apologists are. If you had told me in 2003 that you'd all be rushing to give Congress "credit" for the invasion, I seriously wouldn't have believed it.
Click to expand...

Care to show me where the wording you keep promoting, "to use force if HE chose to do so", is written?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top