Who agrees with Cheney?

[maineman]

You can try with everything you've got....the simple truth is....

You won't change historical fact no matter how hard you employ, implication, association, assumption, insinuation, and assertion...

just because a news source has an historically liberal - or conservative - bias, does not mean that the information that they post...the news that they report....is false.

Bush took us to WAR on the basis of flawed information, which he mischaracterized as being WITHOUT DOUBT. HE took us to WAR, bravo. He is on record as saying that the ONLY mission we had over there was disarmament. It was a war that was started to accomplish a mission that did not need to be accomplished... why you continue to support that decision is beyond me.

 

[NOVA]

just because a news source has an historically liberal - or conservative - bias, does not mean that the information that they post...the news that they report....is false.

Bush took us to WAR on the basis of flawed information, which he mischaracterized as being WITHOUT DOUBT. HE took us to WAR, bravo. He is on record as saying that the ONLY mission we had over there was disarmament. It was a war that was started to accomplish a mission that did not need to be accomplished... why you continue to support that decision is beyond me.

well, well, well....We go back some, don't be MM...a few years ?

Are YOU, gonna tell me that YOU, PERSONALLY, didn't give people shit for linking foxnews as a source....???
YOU and 99% of your fellow Democrats....

Are you really gonna pull that with me....???

 

[maineman]

well, well, well....We go back some, don't be MM...a few years ?

Are YOU, gonna tell me that YOU, PERSONALLY, didn't give people shit for linking foxnews as a source....???
YOU and 99% of your fellow Democrats....

Are you really gonna pull that with me....???

I questioned when someone reported news commentary as news. My statement is true and you know it:

just because a news source has an historically liberal - or conservative - bias, does not mean that the information that they post...the news that they report....is false.

 

[NOVA]

just because a news source has an historically liberal - or conservative - bias, does not mean that the information that they post...the news that they report....is false.

Bush took us to WAR on the basis of flawed information, which he mischaracterized as being WITHOUT DOUBT. HE took us to WAR, bravo. He is on record as saying that the ONLY mission we had over there was disarmament.

You and I have been over this time and time again MM....I've lost count on the number of times .....you know where I stand and you know exactly what my responses will be ....I ain't gonna go over it again and again....
Yeah, Bush took us to war...after a War resolution passed in Congress, with Dem support..enough to get the bill passed...yes votes from some of the biggest and brightest stars in the Democratic party......anything else on that vote is ...superfluous and irrelevant...so spar me...

Mission creep...? Yep...you Dems were loud and clear (Even Colin Powell agreed) we broke it, we bought it....
Our country's goal was 'regime change'..for many years, you remember
that ?....obviously, it never changed....the mindset after 9/11 was different than the mindset of 1996-99, etc...


It was a war that was started to accomplish a mission that did not need to be accomplished... why you continue to support that decision is beyond me.

That could be debated for hours, without purpose.....you KNOW what the rhetoric was about Saddam and Iraq and WMD for the past 15+ years....it didn't just appear after the 2000 election...you know it and I know it....and I wish the hell the Dims would just stop playing the blame game for every damn thing that happens...get over the impeachment already.....

The war was voted on, passed, and initiated....too bad, water under the bridge....all the blame game crap ain't gonna change it now....
Saddams dead, Iraq is in turmoil, and we are the reason why.....we MUST continue the mission, even Obama sees that, despite any rhetoric...
Terrorist HAVE to be fought, even Obama sees that, despite any rhetoric.

so enough already....

.

 

[NOVA]

I questioned when someone reported news commentary as news. My statement is true and you know it:

just because a news source has an historically liberal - or conservative - bias, does not mean that the information that they post...the news that they report....is false.

You, along with most of you like minded friends, refused to acknowledge FOXNEWS as a legitimate news source for months, it not years...and many of your fellow Dems still do that to this day.....so lets not quibble with the "commentary" crap as an explanation..... lets forgo the word games for a change.....

just because a news source has an historically liberal - or conservative - bias, does not mean that the information that they post...the news that they report....is false.

Yeah...I agree....BUT....

The Newstatesman----a left wing blog pushing a Socialist agenda...by their own description....

Thinkprogress?
Media Matters??
The freekin' Huffingtonpost???

Liberal and left wing blogs...not NEWS outlets or NEWS sources....these sites spin facts, mis-characterize issues, and sometimes clearly lie about what some person said and what was meant in a particular context.....
Do you get your news from the Daily KOS? or would you ?

 

[maineman]

if one does not learn from history, one is destined to repeat it. I won't ever give Bush or his party a pass on the Iraq war and the irreparable damage it has done and will continue to do to American interests throughout the world...

and if the hanging chads had hung the other way and Al Gore had been elected...if HE and the democrats had taken us to war in Iraq using the same evidence, I would have left my party and would be castigating them just as soundly today.

 

[NOVA]

if one does not learn from history, one is destined to repeat it. I won't ever give Bush or his party a pass on the Iraq war and the irreparable damage it has done and will continue to do to American interests throughout the world...

and if the hanging chads had hung the other way and Al Gore had been elected...if HE and the democrats had taken us to war in Iraq using the same evidence, I would have left my party and would be castigating them just as soundly today.

You've been consistent about the war, no doubt...

Me on the other hand...I bought what I now know was "questionable" Senate testimony about Iraqis and events in Kuwait....
I actually believed the Democrats all those years while Clinton was President....
They convinced me Saddam had WMD...
They convinced me he was a threat to everyone around him...
They convinced me he was getting close to a nuke bomb....
They convinced me he was killing his citizens just for fun....
They convinced me "regime change" was only a matter of time and that Clinton would get it done.......
And G Bush was a trillion miles away in Texas playing with some oilmen or watching baseball games....

I wanted Clinton to go kick ass....but all I got was a few airstrikes and a few missile attacks....and US ships blown up and embassys bombed...
Then 9/11....I thought,...."fuckin Muslims"...."fuckin' Arabs"....and the Dem. rhetoric continued....and Bush chimed in with the same dire warnings.....

So I bought it....I bought it because I believed the Clinton Administration and when Bush was elected, the same warning were heard daily....

Why do I remember, while the liberals seem to have never heard of Saddam until Bush got to Washington????
Suddenly the intell was cooked....was it cooked in the Clinton years...
Saddam has no WMD....didn't Clinton tell me differently...for years....

 

[USFREEDOM911]

You've been consistent about the war, no doubt...

Me on the other hand...I bought what I now know was "questionable" Senate testimony about Iraqis and events in Kuwait....
I actually believed the Democrats all those years while Clinton was President....
They convinced me Saddam had WMD...
They convinced me he was a threat to everyone around him...
They convinced me he was getting close to a nuke bomb....
They convinced me he was killing his citizens just for fun....
They convinced me "regime change" was only a matter of time and that Clinton would get it done.......
And G Bush was a trillion miles away in Texas playing with some oilmen or watching baseball games....

I wanted Clinton to go kick ass....but all I got was a few airstrikes and a few missile attacks....and US ships blown up and embassys bombed...
Then 9/11....I thought,...."fuckin Muslims"...."fuckin' Arabs"....and the Dem. rhetoric continued....and Bush chimed in with the same dire warnings.....

So I bought it....I bought it because I believed the Clinton Administration and when Bush was elected, the same warning were heard daily....

Why do I remember, while the liberals seem to have never heard of Saddam until Bush got to Washington????
Suddenly the intell was cooked....was it cooked in the Clinton years...
Saddam has no WMD....didn't Clinton tell me differently...for years....

But Bravo; that was different, because after Clinton they all KNEW that it wasn't true and that Bush was just using smoke and mirrors.

Hasn't that been obvious??

 

[Taichiliberal]

The 30 percenters haven't dealt with it, yet, they won't, thanks for trying Senor'

Bravo seems to be intent upon regurgitating EVERY disproven talking point used by the neocon GOP for the last 8 years. Note how he ignores any and everything that logically disproves his beliefs, and then just repeats a previously discussed point. It's pretty pathetic.....like you said, they just can't deal with the reality.

 

[NOVA]

But Bravo; that was different, because after Clinton they all KNEW that it wasn't true and that Bush was just using smoke and mirrors.

Hasn't that been obvious??

after Clinton they all KNEW that it wasn't true and that Bush was just using smoke and mirrors.?

Is that right....They all knew....

Then you might pay close attention to these quotes....try reading them for a change...try looking at the dates....
and please don't give me that shit that they were misled....they are the same people, saying the same things, for years....Freekin' THINK for a change..are you totally incapable of putting 2 and 2 together..They weren't misled in 2000 and they sure as hell weren't misled in 2001


"There is no doubt that . 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 the 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.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is useing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. 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), Oct. 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), Oct. 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 Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 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), Oct 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. "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 has 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), Jan. 23. 2003.

 

[Whomever]

As I have said before many dems were sucked into the delusions as well.

That still does not release "the Decider" from his ultimate responsibility.
None of those people decided to invade and occupy IRAQ.
They helped to give Bush the option as a last resort.
Which he exercised long before last resort stage.
A new thing for America, a preemptive invasion and occupation of a sovern nation.

Yeah sadam sucked, but so did Bush.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

after Clinton they all KNEW that it wasn't true and that Bush was just using smoke and mirrors.?

Is that right....They all knew....

Then you might pay close attention to these quotes....try reading them for a change...try looking at the dates....
and please don't give me that shit that they were misled....they are the same people, saying the same things, for years....Freekin' THINK for a change..are you totally incapable of putting 2 and 2 together..They weren't misled in 2000 and they sure as hell weren't misled in 2001


"There is no doubt that . 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 the 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.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is useing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. 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), Oct. 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), Oct. 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 Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002,

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 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), Oct 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. "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 has 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), Jan. 23. 2003.

Bravo:
Calm down; I was agreeing with you, not poking at you.

 

[Taichiliberal]

As I have said before many dems were sucked into the delusions as well.

That still does not release "the Decider" from his ultimate responsibility.
None of those people decided to invade and occupy IRAQ.
They helped to give Bush the option as a last resort.
Which he exercised long before last resort stage.
A new thing for America, a preemptive invasion and occupation of a sovern nation.

Yeah sadam sucked, but so did Bush.

Short & sweet and to the point....even the dumbest neocon should get it. But that would mean admitting their lord God Shrub & minions were wrong...and they can't handle that.

Oh well, "Bravo!"

 

[NOVA]

Short & sweet and to the point....even the dumbest neocon should get it. But that would mean admitting their lord God Shrub & minions were wrong...and they can't handle that.

Oh well, "Bravo!"

haha..the gift that keeps on giving....

I give you 17 quotes, all warnings about Saddam and WMD, and ALL FROM DEMOCRATS....from 1998 to 2003....

and along comes this pinhead to tell us that Shrub & minions were wrong

pwning this pinhead isn't even a challenge anymore....its been fun....
game over, you are dismissed !

 

[Whomever]

haha..the gift that keeps on giving....

I give you 17 quotes, all warnings about Saddam and WMD, and ALL FROM DEMOCRATS....from 1998 to 2003....

and along comes this pinhead to tell us that Shrub & minions were wrong

pwning this pinhead isn't even a challenge anymore....its been fun....
game over, you are dismissed !

Declare mission accomplished and move on? How Bushian of you.

 

[zappasguitar]

Actually, I commented on your earlier post before I saw this, so now you can tell me how wrong you were and apologize profusely.

When you are right, you are right.

I was wrong...my apologies.

 

[maineman]

haha..the gift that keeps on giving....

I give you 17 quotes, all warnings about Saddam and WMD, and ALL FROM DEMOCRATS....from 1998 to 2003....

and along comes this pinhead to tell us that Shrub & minions were wrong

pwning this pinhead isn't even a challenge anymore....its been fun....
game over, you are dismissed !

and again...did any of those democrats advocate invading conquering and occupying Iraq?

 

[BRUTALITOPS]

this thread makes me want to kill myself.

 

[NOVA]

and again...did any of those democrats advocate invading conquering and occupying Iraq?

And again....quite irrelevant to the subject......and another thing altogether...

But since you bring it up....some of those quoted Dems certainly did vote for war (invasion)...and occupation....(because you can't have one without the other in the real world)....Reid, Kennedy, Clinton, Rockefeller, Daschle, etc...but again, thats another matter....

 

[USFREEDOM911]

And again....quite irrelevant to the subject......and another thing altogether...

But since you bring it up....some of those quoted Dems certainly did vote for war (invasion)...and occupation....(because you can't have one without the other in the real world)....Reid, Kennedy, Clinton, Rockefeller, Daschle, etc...but again, thats another matter....

For some reason they think that it's OK that the anti-right vote for it; but since the anti-right didn't VERBALLY say that it was OK, that that makes the anti-right innocent.