Ted Kennedy, Still an embarresment to the country even in death

Onceler said:
Well, for starters, it wasn't officially called the "WAR" resolution. But I understand your need to lie.

And second, that's a really long way of saying, yes - Bush & Bush alone made the decision to invade, and it was his war.
Click to expand...

Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution#cite_note-ResolutionText-0

Now explain to all of us how the use of military force against a sovereign county is not WAR....I CAN'T FUCKIN' WAIT......
-----------------------

lets hear the spin......how does a country use its military against another country and realistically claim its not war....???

Here is how an imbecile like onecell thinks.....

A Resolution to Kill and Disband Iraq's Military Forces..................................that can't be officially called a "WAR" resolution ....the word "war" is never mentioned.....
A Resolution to Invade and Enslave the People of Iraq................................that can't be officially called a "WAR" resolution ....the word "war" is never mentioned......
A Resolution to Oust Saddam by Force and Instill a New Government.............that can't be officially called a "WAR" resolution ....the word "war" is never mentioned.......
A Resolution to Dismantle the Iraqi Government and Force a new Government On the Population.....that can't be officially called a war resolution ...the word "war" is never mentioned.......
A Resolution to Take Control of Iraq and the Population by Force..................that can't be officially called a "WAR" resolution ....the word "war" is never mentioned......


According to the pinhead....all these statements would be truthful.....

So
the first resolution must be the Kill and Disband Resolution...
the second resolution must be Invade and Enslave Resolution
the third must be the Oust Saddam Resolution and so on and so forth.....

Thats mental illness ......its like saying ...you can't be a murderer unless you've been convicted of killing someone......its ludicrous logic and pathetic reasoning....

If you punch your neighbor in the face, you wouldn't be arrested for assault...you'd be arrested for punching....
If you burn your neighbors house down, you wouldn't be arrested for arson, you'd be arrested for starting a fire....
 
Onceler said:
And bravs - you said it was called the "WAR Resolution."

You just proved yourself wrong.
Click to expand...

So thats what you got out of post 282, huh ????

How sad....how pitiful....how pathetic you show yourself to be......

Its odd that not even one other pinhead comes to your defense in this discussion.....don't you find it odd......?

There must be at least one other that is as stupid as you....I'm surprised....
 
bravo said:
So thats what you got out of post 282, huh ????

How sad....how pitiful....how pathetic you show yourself to be......

Its odd that not even one other pinhead comes to your defense in this discussion.....don't you find it odd......?

There must be at least one other that is as stupid as you....I'm surprised....
Click to expand...

Do you need people to "come to your defense"? Actually, I shouldn't even ask that; it's obvious.

But, yeah - that's what I got out of that post of yours. It wasn't called the "War resolution," as you have stated is FACT about a dozen times. It just shows how baseless your idiocy is.

It's funny that you righties say I have BDS and that I'm a fool for merely saying this: Bush made the decision to invade Iraq. That's brutal for you guys. Which, once again, shows how right the left was about Iraq from the get go.
 
bravo said:
"Bush himself has said he was the decider, and has talked about the decision to invade many times."//.........exactly....

and this is why the Congress knew exactly what they were voting for when they said YES to giving Bush the Authority to use military force in Iraq....

Thanks for making that clear........

TO USE MILITARY FORCE is the classic definition of WAR.....The AUTHORITY to use it is to CONDONE, ALLOW, and PERMIT a war to take place....
Click to expand...

No. Congress did NOT know exactly what they were voting for. First, the CIA's report was 90 pages long and included dissensions and challenges.

"...the CIA drew together an October 1, 2002 National Intelligence Estimate on Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction, pulling together the intelligence, estimations, opinions and judgments of 16 different U.S. intelligence services, including dissenting views or challenges to various assertions. Several versions of this report were or have been produced with varying levels of declassification, inclusion of dissenting opinions, and completeness.
Click to expand...

However:

President Bush received [only] a one-page summary of the National Intelligence Estimate.
Click to expand...

While I'm pretty sure a 90-page report can be boiled down to a single sheet, it does seem that a lot of salient information wouldn't be included.

Furthermore:

The White House and the Central Intelligence Agency have refused to give the Senate Intelligence Committee a one-page summary of prewar intelligence in Iraq prepared for President Bush that contains few of the qualifiers and none of the dissents spelled out in longer intelligence reviews, according to Congressional officials.
Click to expand...

Repubs were dismissive of Dem's attempts to see it.

Senate Democrats claim that the document could help clear up exactly what intelligence agencies told Mr. Bush about Iraq's illicit weapons. The administration and the C.I.A. say the White House is protected by executive privilege, and Republicans on the committee dismissed the Democrats' argument that the summary was significant.
Click to expand...

And no surprise here:

The review, prepared for President Bush in October 2002, summarized the findings of a classified, 90-page National Intelligence Estimate about Iraq's illicit weapons. Congressional officials said that notes taken by Senate staffers who were permitted to review the document show that it eliminated references to dissent within the government about the National Intelligence Estimate's conclusions.
Click to expand...

Want more?




http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/14/w...-prewar-intelligence.html?pagewanted=2&src=pm
 
bravo said:
Hans Blix ........

He is not a citizen of the US and has no allegiance to the US

He is not a US Intelligence agent

He is not a CIA agent

He is not an FBI agent

He is not US military

Hans Blix is a Swedish diplomat and politician for the Liberal People's Party.....and hardly interested in what policy is in the interest of the United States.

Bush did not write the NIE of the 16 intelligence agencys that confer to give advice to the President
Bush did not manufacture the intelligence that came from the UK, or Germany or France, etc....
Bush did not force the entire UN to vote unanimously (16+ times) to condemn Saddam and his WMD...
Click to expand...

Bush pushed the UN to investigate Iraq for WMD. The UN previously chose Rolf Ekeus to lead the team but some of the countries objected to him so Blix got the job. I haven't found any info that bush was distrustful of Blix beforehand.
 
christiefan915 said:
Bush pushed the UN to investigate Iraq for WMD. The UN previously chose Rolf Ekeus to lead the team but some of the countries objected to him so Blix got the job. I haven't found any info that bush was distrustful of Blix beforehand.
Click to expand...

No one ever claimed Bush was "distrustful" of Mr. Blix.....before or after his assessment of WMD in Iraq....

Bush just choose to put more trust into our own and our allys intelligence conclusions.......
 
bravo said:
No one ever claimed Bush was "distrustful" of Mr. Blix.....before or after his assessment of WMD in Iraq....

Bush just choose to put more trust into our own and our allys intelligence conclusions.......
Click to expand...

Well... no, he didn't. Seeing as how he didn't take into account when some of our allies criticized the reasons for going war, saying that the WH manipulated the intel and exaggerated the threat of WMDs.

Particularly damning, IMO, is that when the NIE was released, almost 90% of the info was redacted.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB129/nie.pdf
 
Onceler said:
How interesting. You couldn't answer my question.

Pretty telling. It isn't "BDS" to say Bush made the decision to invade. If that's the case, then Bush himself has BDS.

What a funny apologist you are...
Click to expand...

How interesting . You can't admit that there would have been no invasion with the congressional vote. Being accurate about history doesn't mean anyone is an "apologist". You're BDS has taken control of you. "Bush's War" is your sacred cow. You've believed it so long that even the truth will not change your mind. It's common among cultic minded people.

Are you also among those who believe the US Supreme Court gave the 2000 election to Bush?
 
bravo said:
No one ever claimed Bush was "distrustful" of Mr. Blix.....before or after his assessment of WMD in Iraq....

Bush just choose to put more trust into our own and our allys intelligence conclusions.......
Click to expand...

You mean like when British intelligence said that "the intel was being fixed around the policy"?
 
christiefan915 said:
Well... no, he didn't. Seeing as how he didn't take into account when some of our allies criticized the reasons for going war, saying that the WH manipulated the intel and exaggerated the threat of WMDs.

Particularly damning, IMO, is that when the NIE was released, almost 90% of the info was redacted.

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB129/nie.pdf
Click to expand...

There were no allys criticizing Bush ... there were individuals from foreign countries that disagreed.....
Thats like characterizing a criticism from Harry Reid the individial, as a criticism from the US Senate....

And have you EVER EVER EVER seen any US President release raw TOP SECRET intelligence for public consumption....EVER ???
If you think any president would or should, you're not thinking clearly.....it just ain't gonna happen....EVER......

You can accuse Bush of manipulating intelligence data a day long .... it won't make it so.....Politicians are accused of thousands of things in a never ending stream.....the accusations don't make it so.....next you'll be telling me Clinton was a rapist and Hillary killed Vince Foster because someone made an accusation....

Bush didn't write the Oct. NIE no matter how many accusations there are.....
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

National Intelligence Estimate....October 2002

Six agencies of the US Intelligence Community (15 agencies), Iraq’s Continuing Programs for Weapons of Mass Destruction (U.S. CIA, NIE: National Intelligence Estimate, October 1 2002, 90 pages), secret, authorship unknown, personal responsibility, George Tenet (Director of Central intelligence), these excerpts released July 18 2003 in an off-the-record White House press briefing by a “senior administration official” who subsequently identified himself on-the-record (July 22) as Dan Bartlett, White House Director of Communications. –CJHjr
-----------------------------------------
Confidence Levels for Selected Key Judgments in This Estimate
High Confidence:

• Iraq is continuing, and in some areas expanding its chemical, biological, nuclear and missile programs contrary to UN resolutions.

• We are not detecting portions of these weapons programs.

• Iraq possesses proscribed chemical and biological weapons and missiles.

• Iraq could make a nuclear weapon in months to a year once if acquires sufficient weapons-grade fissile material.
Moderate Confidence:

• Iraq does not yet have a nuclear weapon or sufficient material to make one but is likely to have a weapon by 2007 to 2009. (See INR alternative view, page 84).
Low Confidence:

• When Saddam would use weapons of mass destruction.

• Whether Saddam would engage in clandestine attacks against the US Homeland.

• Whether in desperation Saddam would share chemical or biological weapons with al-Qa'ida.


http://homepage.ntlworld.com/jksonc/docs/nie-iraq-wmd.htm
 
Last edited:
Are you fully aware that a bipartisan Senate investigation found no evidence of political pressure to change the intelligence community’s judgments related to Iraq’s weapons programs.

The caveats and qualified conclusions that were contained in the classified NIE but omitted from the white paper that was redacted for the public......was what was considered 'manipulation'.......
and example...

Classified NIE: “Although we have little specific information on Iraq’s CW stockpile, Saddam Hussein probably has stocked at least 100 metric tons” of such poisons.
Unclassified NIE: The phrase “although we have little specific information” was deleted. Instead, the public report said, “Saddam probably has stocked a few hundred metric tons of CW agents.”
[Senate Intel Cmte Report]

Classified NIE: “Iraq has some lethal and incapacitating BW [biological weapons] agents and is capable of quickly producing “¦ a variety of such agents, including anthrax, for delivery by bombs, missiles, aerial sprayers and covert operatives.”
Unclassified NIE: The words “potentially against the U.S. homeland” are inserted at the end of the statement.
[Senate Intel Cmte Report]

Big deal?....A mountain out of a molehill ? ....A distinction without a difference.....nit-picking.....and early example of BDS......

All this nonsense over 1....ONE.....NIE white paper released to the public.....
The so called 'caveats' were just CYA for intell. that was known to be less than accurate....most intell. is......

NIE......National Intelligence ESTIMATE......that could accurately be changed to GUESSTIMATE.....and it occurs in every NIE ever writtten.....
 
Onceler said:
Bush didn't make the decision?

Let's hear it PMP. Say, "No - Bush did not make the decision to invade."
Click to expand...

Bush made the decision, as approved by a majority of Congress......you didn't stop it so it's obviously Onceler's War.......at least it's Onceler's ridiculous game of semantics taken to the extreme level just so he can pretend he's got a valid point.....nobody gives a shit about your game, Onceler.......you've taken this thread to the point where there is nothing to do except laugh at you.....
 
PostmodernProphet said:
Bush made the decision, as approved by a majority of Congress......you didn't stop it so it's obviously Onceler's War.......at least it's Onceler's ridiculous game of semantics taken to the extreme level just so he can pretend he's got a valid point.....nobody gives a shit about your game, Onceler.......you've taken this thread to the point where there is nothing to do except laugh at you.....
Click to expand...

It was intended, from the Democrat point of view, as a demonstration that the US was serious and to concentrate Iraqi minds. I notice that nobody has addressed the fact that the war was illegal under international law anyway.
 
Aoxomoxoa said:
It was intended, from the Democrat point of view, as a demonstration that the US was serious and to concentrate Iraqi minds. I notice that nobody has addressed the fact that the war was illegal under international law anyway.
Click to expand...

uh, no.....it was intended, as it has always been intended historically, to give the president the authority to take extended military action.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top