Thursday at 9 on MSNBC the truth will be told

Truth Detector said:
No one is pretending it wasn't his call dumbass; it's your version that suggests he was alone in his belief and that 36 other leaders and a large number of Democrats didn't agree with him. But then, you're too fucking stupid to comprehend the obvious which is why you were one of the low information dunces who voted for Obummer; twice nonetheless.

Moron.
Click to expand...

Actually, it's exactly what everyone is arguing. All I have said this entire thread is that Bush made the call. And all you braindead apologists come back with is, well, uh, uh, Congress voted for it, and uh, uh, they passed the resolution & all, and uh, what was Bush supposed to do?

Go back and read that resolution, idiot worshipper. There isn't one word in there mandating that Bush invade Iraq; no timeline, nothing that forced his hand, or caused him to order an invasion. NOTHING. It was HIS CALL. HIS ALONE. He made the decision to invade Iraq, which was one of the worst foreign policy blunders of the modern era.

And don't try to dispute that last part, o' lobotomized one. You have already admitted as much by bending over backwards trying to give Democrats "credit." If Iraq was a raging success, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Fool.
 
excuse me but I know one of the producers of this and they told me explicitly that there was no proof in this upcoming documentary and it was mostly speculation. They did inform me though that there was no white phosphorus used after all.
 
these brain addled fools will just deny all the evidence uncovered in the government records.

just like they pretend the court records all the way to the SCOTUS that PROVE the republican party has cheated in elections to win for decades are not completely documented
 
PostmodernProphet said:
lol....that's a funny one......
Click to expand...

Is it funny? Really? Because the guy in charge of inspections reported to Congress just before we invaded that inspectors had unfettered access to all suspected WMD sites.

And had they been allowed to continue, they would have found what it took trillions & many lives to discover - that Iraq had no WMD's.

Forgive me if I don't exactly see the "humor" in that.
 
Thing1 said:
Actually, it's exactly what everyone is arguing. All I have said this entire thread is that Bush made the call. And all you braindead apologists come back with is, well, uh, uh, Congress voted for it, and uh, uh, they passed the resolution & all, and uh, what was Bush supposed to do?

Go back and read that resolution, idiot worshipper. There isn't one word in there mandating that Bush invade Iraq; no timeline, nothing that forced his hand, or caused him to order an invasion. NOTHING. It was HIS CALL. HIS ALONE. He made the decision to invade Iraq, which was one of the worst foreign policy blunders of the modern era.

And don't try to dispute that last part, o' lobotomized one. You have already admitted as much by bending over backwards trying to give Democrats "credit." If Iraq was a raging success, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Fool.
Click to expand...

You're a fucking moron.
 
evince said:
these brain addled fools will just deny all the evidence uncovered in the government records.

just like they pretend the court records all the way to the SCOTUS that PROVE the republican party has cheated in elections to win for decades are not completely documented
Click to expand...

It's past 9 Eastern; where's this ground stopping evidence?
 
Thing1 said:
Is it funny? Really? Because the guy in charge of inspections reported to Congress just before we invaded that inspectors had unfettered access to all suspected WMD sites.

And had they been allowed to continue, they would have found what it took trillions & many lives to discover - that Iraq had no WMD's.

Forgive me if I don't exactly see the "humor" in that.
Click to expand...

You wallow in revisionist history and hindsight. But alas, you're a despot/terrorist loving asshole. Yay you!
 
Truth Detector said:
You wallow in revisionist history and hindsight. But alas, you're a despot/terrorist loving asshole. Yay you!
Click to expand...

Revisionist history is trying to pretend Bush didn't make the decision to invade.

And you can google it - Hans Blix reported in March of 2003 that inspectors had unfettered access to all suspected WMD sites. There was no need to rush to war.
 
Thing1 said:
Revisionist history is trying to pretend Bush didn't make the decision to invade.

And you can google it - Hans Blix reported in March of 2003 that inspectors had unfettered access to all suspected WMD sites. There was no need to rush to war.
Click to expand...

No dunce; revisionist is pretending that we knew for a fact that Saddam hadn't re-constituted his WMD program and spent ten years ignoring the agreement he made to the UN after his storm troopers were ejected from Kuwait.

If only we had your hindsight and revisionist version of history before the invasion right dumbass? But here we are 11 years later still debating with morons like you after the fact.
 
Truth Detector said:
No dunce; revisionist is pretending that we knew for a fact that Saddam hadn't re-constituted his WMD program and spent ten years ignoring the agreement he made to the UN after his storm troopers were ejected from Kuwait.

If only we had your hindsight and revisionist version of history before the invasion right dumbass? But here we are 11 years later still debating with morons like you after the fact.
Click to expand...

Actually, no - all we had to do was wait for inspectors to do there jobs. But Bush couldn't do that; it was all rush, rush w/ him.

See, I happen to think a good CIC is someone who bends over backwards looking for reasons NOT to go to war, and only uses our military as a last resort. Not someone who sees it as a 1st option and can't wait to get in there, and says "bring 'em on" from thousands of miles away with young men & women in harm's way.

But that's just me.
 
and it really isn't about knowing for a fact that he HADN'T reconstituted his WMD program, it was about our failure to know for a fact that he HAD. And even WITHOUT that knowledge, Dubya lied to us nonetheless and told us that there was absolute certainty that Saddam had stockpiles when no such absolute certainty ever existed.
 
Thing1 said:
Actually, no - all we had to do was wait for inspectors to do there jobs. But Bush couldn't do that; it was all rush, rush w/ him.

See, I happen to think a good CIC is someone who bends over backwards looking for reasons NOT to go to war, and only uses our military as a last resort. Not someone who sees it as a 1st option and can't wait to get in there, and says "bring 'em on" from thousands of miles away with young men & women in harm's way.

But that's just me.
Click to expand...

Yes of course dunce; we could have waited another decade and just maybe Saddam would have cared. It doesn't occur to revisionist dunces like you that Saddam didn't let the inspectors back in until we had boots on the ground.

It wasn't the first option moron; it was the final option. An option taking almost a year and a half in which Saddam made a choice by telling the coalition to pound sand believing, because dunces like you don't think force is ever an option, that Bush would be as feckless and spineless as Clinton was.

But alas, you're loaded with hindsight, revisionist history and stupidity; who can argue with that?? Especially 11years AFTER the fact right dunce?
 
maineman said:
and it really isn't about knowing for a fact that he HADN'T reconstituted his WMD program, it was about our failure to know for a fact that he HAD. And even WITHOUT that knowledge, Dubya lied to us nonetheless and told us that there was absolute certainty that Saddam had stockpiles when no such absolute certainty ever existed.
Click to expand...

More revisionist stupidity. Yay you!!
 
Truth Detector said:
Yes of course dunce; we could have waited another decade and just maybe Saddam would have cared. It doesn't occur to revisionist dunces like you that Saddam didn't let the inspectors back in until we had boots on the ground.

It wasn't the first option moron; it was the final option. An option taking almost a year and a half in which Saddam made a choice by telling the coalition to pound sand believing, because dunces like you don't think force is ever an option, that Bush would be as feckless and spineless as Clinton was.

But alas, you're loaded with hindsight, revisionist history and stupidity; who can argue with that?? Especially 11years AFTER the fact right dunce?
Click to expand...

I don't dispute that boots on the ground forced Saddam's hand on inspections at all.

But what's wrong w/ that? In that creative little mind of yours, can you possibly envision a scenario where the newly compliant Saddam allows inspections while boots are on the ground, and inspections discover there are no WMD's, without invasion?

What an idea! I don't think you realize how many lives were lost or ruined because of that stupid, unnecessary war. It was NOT a last resort. No idiot tries to argue that.
 
Thing1 said:
What an idea! I don't think you realize how many lives were lost or ruined because of that stupid, unnecessary war. It was NOT a last resort. No idiot tries to argue that.
Click to expand...

well.... that's obviously not entirely true. You are arguing with one right now.
 
Thing1 said:
I don't think you realize how many lives were lost or ruined because of that stupid, unnecessary war.
Click to expand...

I don't think you have any idea how many lives were saved and how Iraqs neighbors are safer without a cruel megalomaniac in power. I dont think you comprehend the changes democracy can have in a region historically ruled by dictators and tyrants that create the poverty and hopelessness that breeds terrorism.

But then thinking past the last leftist talking point you've been fed is not your forte'.

Thing1 said:
It was NOT a last resort. No idiot tries to argue that.
Click to expand...

Saddam was given an ultimatum and deadline to comply with demands. Only an idiot tries to argue otherwise.

As for you're talking point about what is "unnecessary"; that is an opinion built upon hindsight and revisionist history.
 
Thing1 said:
Is it funny? Really? Because the guy in charge of inspections reported to Congress just before we invaded that inspectors had unfettered access to all suspected WMD sites.
Click to expand...

well actually no....he did say that a few months after the war started.....the report he gave just before the war stated that they were still getting the run around......I know it sucks that this is public record because it messes with your spin, but hey, nobody gets everything they want in life.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
well actually no....he did say that a few months after the war started.....the report he gave just before the war stated that they were still getting the run around......I know it sucks that this is public record because it messes with your spin, but hey, nobody gets everything they want in life.....
Click to expand...

That's factually incorrect. The "unfettered access" report was in March of '03, just prior to invasion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top