Benghazi - The Nightmare Is Over!

Thing1 said:
That's a great link! Never read that before...
Click to expand...

Yes, it was.....I'm certainly glad you read it.....my only hope is that you understood the words in spite of the attempt at spin by snopes....

It leaves no doubt what was said and what was believe at the time.....

The quotes even after Bush was elected are particularly good....
 
NOVA said:
I only went to open my celebratory wine, great link that proves every thing I said.....
Click to expand...

not exactly. As I have said all along, the Iraq war - being the abysmal foreign policy decision that it was - could only have happened if Team Bush convinced the American people of two falsehoods and do so in the lead up to midterm elections.
1. There was absolute certainty that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's. Not ALMOST certain, not "we're pretty sure", not "I personally believe"... but "THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT SADDAM HAS STOCKPILES OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION". That was never true, and none of the now famous, truncated, out of context democratic quotes, save one, ever expressed absolute certainty about stockpiles of WMD's. And convincing the American people of absolute certainty was essential to making the other lie even more scary.
2. Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda and he even had ties to 9/11 hijackers before 9/11. That was also patently false, and team Bush knew it was when they said it.

If it was absolutely certain that Saddam had WMD's and it was true that Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda in general and to 9/11 hijackers in specific, then how in the world could we risk waiting for Hans Blix to look all over Iraq for those WMD's when ANY MINUTE!!!!!!!! ANY SECOND!!!!!!! wicked Al Qaeda terrorists could be planting nuclear warheads in parks in major American cities and the smoking gun would be a mushroom cloud over those American cities. Even though the Use of Force Resolution specifically stated that armed invasion was to be the very last option attempted, as soon as it was passed, it became the ONLY option that team Bush considered.

If there was uncertainty about Saddam's stockpiles (and there always were varying degrees of uncertainty about them), and/or if there were no reason to suspect that Saddam would provide tactical support for an organization whose primary goal was his own demise (and there really wasn't, for obvious reasons), then the American people had no reason to demand that their elected representatives vote for such a resolution, and the president had no reason to actually invade Iraq.
 
Thing1 said:
Did any of those names lie us into a 10-year war?

According to what they said, being exactly what Bush said, so according to you.....Every one of them...

Did any of those names tell deliberate lies in their SOU speech about mobile bio-weapons labs that they had found out just a few days earlier did not exist?

No, they only told us of the nuclear weapons, chemical stockpiles and bio-weapons....but not mobile.

Did any of those names make a decision to go to war, and then "sell" the war by "fixing" the intel around the policy?

Are you claiming Bush wrote the Nov. NIE ?...Can you prove that ?....thats one...ONE Brits opinion and it didn't deter their assistance...

Oh - and did I mention that most of the quotes you have are from the '90's, when it's clear that sanctions did their job? And that none of them call for invasion?

they did their job?...and still the Dems were whining in 1998 well into 2001 and 2002... THEN, they voted for the WAR RESOLUTION, and there was no doubt what
that meant, unless you insist they were fools....?...did their job your ass.....

Not that particular word you're obsessed with, invasion, no...Clinton:"I am quite confident, from the briefing I have just received from out military leaders, that we can achieve the objective and secure, etc.,etc., etc...."....seems our military at the time choose air strikes, missiles and bombs only,(btw, thats WAR)....actually, so did Bush, along with ground troops to actually finish the job and do it right instead of half ass....Clinton was screwing around since 92 and this quote was from the 98 SOTU....it it was up to him, we'd still be screwing around with Saddam....now its over and we ended his reign as dictator....

Post those quotes. They support me much more than they support you & your embarassing hypocrisy.
Click to expand...


They support you ?....in your dreams sonny.....In context, their quotes are even more powerful showing that they absolutely believed Saddam had the WMD and warned,
over and over of the danger he presented.....over a period of years and years.....
You might to get someone without BDS to explain it all to you....
 
maineman said:
And you actually DID?
Click to expand...


The testimony certainly contradicts the bullshit the Obama admin. was peddling to the public....and the lies coming from Hillary....

I sure hope the 4th one gets to testify too....shes gonna be even better ...... but Obama is stonewalling her ability to talk .....
 
maineman said:
not exactly. As I have said all along, the Iraq war - being the abysmal foreign policy decision that it was - could only have happened if Team Bush convinced the American people of two falsehoods and do so in the lead up to midterm elections.
1. There was absolute certainty that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's. Not ALMOST certain, not "we're pretty sure", not "I personally believe"... but "THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT SADDAM HAS STOCKPILES OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION". That was never true, and none of the now famous, truncated, out of context democratic quotes, save one, ever expressed absolute certainty about stockpiles of WMD's. And convincing the American people of absolute certainty was essential to making the other lie even more scary.
2. Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda and he even had ties to 9/11 hijackers before 9/11. That was also patently false, and team Bush knew it was when they said it.

If it was absolutely certain that Saddam had WMD's and it was true that Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda in general and to 9/11 hijackers in specific, then how in the world could we risk waiting for Hans Blix to look all over Iraq for those WMD's when ANY MINUTE!!!!!!!! ANY SECOND!!!!!!! wicked Al Qaeda terrorists could be planting nuclear warheads in parks in major American cities and the smoking gun would be a mushroom cloud over those American cities. Even though the Use of Force Resolution specifically stated that armed invasion was to be the very last option attempted, as soon as it was passed, it became the ONLY option that team Bush considered.

If there was uncertainty about Saddam's stockpiles (and there always were varying degrees of uncertainty about them), and/or if there were no reason to suspect that Saddam would provide tactical support for an organization whose primary goal was his own demise (and there really wasn't, for obvious reasons), then the American people had no reason to demand that their elected representatives vote for such a resolution, and the president had no reason to actually invade Iraq.
Click to expand...


Convincing the American people was 90% accomplished by the democrats during the Clinton years and then into the Bush admin.
Sept. 23, 2002, a short few weeks before the mid-terms, the VP himself, AL Gore said, "We KNOW he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons THROUGHOUT
his country.....Bill Clinton's vice president....

And in the context of his speech, warned Bush not to make the mistake of winning a war and then abandoning the country resulting in chaos.....

Thats practically telling Bush exactly how to conduct the war AND ITS aftermath....to be prepared and plan to occupy the country is the obvious warning to Bush.

Don't pussyfoot around parsing words in a lame attempt to spin the quotes....Clinton was bombing the shit out of Saddam just 2 years before....was it a 'way the dog'
moment or did he believe Saddam was a danger ..... pick one.

It was called THE IRAQ W A R RESOLUTION.....that doesn't leave anything to the imagination...to claim otherwise is bullshit and Monday morning liberal spin.....
EVERYONE KNEW what the vote was for .... the preparations were already underway...
 
Last edited:
bombing the shit out of him? hardly. He took out a few radar installations. period. shock and awe happened under Dubya.

Team Clinton never tried to convince the American people of the certainty of Saddam's WMD stockpiles and they certainly never tried to convince them about a Saddam/Al Qaeda connection. Those lies were critical to gaining public support and they were ALL team Bush.
 
and spin all you like, Bravo. If I said that there is no doubt that the Red Sox will win the AL East this year, that is a LIE, even before the season comes to an end, because there is, in fact, doubt. When Team Bush said "there is no doubt that Saddam has stockpiles of WMD's", that was a lie for the very same reason.

Now... if I said, that I personally have no doubt that the Red Sox will win the AL East, that is a different statement altogether. Words have meanings and people ought to be held accountable for what they say, not for what they meant to say, but, oops, didn't quite say.
 
maineman said:
not exactly. As I have said all along, the Iraq war - being the abysmal foreign policy decision that it was - could only have happened if Team Bush convinced the American people of two falsehoods and do so in the lead up to midterm elections.
1. There was absolute certainty that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's. Not ALMOST certain, not "we're pretty sure", not "I personally believe"... but "THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT SADDAM HAS STOCKPILES OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION". That was never true, and none of the now famous, truncated, out of context democratic quotes, save one, ever expressed absolute certainty about stockpiles of WMD's. And convincing the American people of absolute certainty was essential to making the other lie even more scary.
2. Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda and he even had ties to 9/11 hijackers before 9/11. That was also patently false, and team Bush knew it was when they said it.

If it was absolutely certain that Saddam had WMD's and it was true that Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda in general and to 9/11 hijackers in specific, then how in the world could we risk waiting for Hans Blix to look all over Iraq for those WMD's when ANY MINUTE!!!!!!!! ANY SECOND!!!!!!! wicked Al Qaeda terrorists could be planting nuclear warheads in parks in major American cities and the smoking gun would be a mushroom cloud over those American cities. Even though the Use of Force Resolution specifically stated that armed invasion was to be the very last option attempted, as soon as it was passed, it became the ONLY option that team Bush considered.

If there was uncertainty about Saddam's stockpiles (and there always were varying degrees of uncertainty about them), and/or if there were no reason to suspect that Saddam would provide tactical support for an organization whose primary goal was his own demise (and there really wasn't, for obvious reasons), then the American people had no reason to demand that their elected representatives vote for such a resolution, and the president had no reason to actually invade Iraq.
Click to expand...

But if Benghazi is old news and shouldn't be spoken of, after the long 8 months, why are you jabbering on about decade old news?
 
maineman said:
I know you really WANT it to all be a big huge bombshell that ends up with the president being impeached and you parading around the interwebz proclaiming what a brilliant guy you are, but none of that is gonna happen.... well, except the last part, you do that already without a lick of proof to back up your claim!
Click to expand...

Can you people stop being partisan hacks long enough to listen to the testimony that absolutely proves the admin was lying and covering themselves from the beginning. I have no doubt that is why Obama left and went to sleep, so he could claim I don't not nuttin duh. Hillary lied, rice lied, panetta lied, then dmoted people to keep others quiet.
 
maineman said:
not exactly. As I have said all along, the Iraq war - being the abysmal foreign policy decision that it was - could only have happened if Team Bush convinced the American people of two falsehoods and do so in the lead up to midterm elections.
1. There was absolute certainty that Saddam had stockpiles of WMD's. Not ALMOST certain, not "we're pretty sure", not "I personally believe"... but "THERE IS NO DOUBT THAT SADDAM HAS STOCKPILES OF WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION". That was never true, and none of the now famous, truncated, out of context democratic quotes, save one, ever expressed absolute certainty about stockpiles of WMD's. And convincing the American people of absolute certainty was essential to making the other lie even more scary.
2. Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda and he even had ties to 9/11 hijackers before 9/11. That was also patently false, and team Bush knew it was when they said it.

If it was absolutely certain that Saddam had WMD's and it was true that Saddam had ties to Al Qaeda in general and to 9/11 hijackers in specific, then how in the world could we risk waiting for Hans Blix to look all over Iraq for those WMD's when ANY MINUTE!!!!!!!! ANY SECOND!!!!!!! wicked Al Qaeda terrorists could be planting nuclear warheads in parks in major American cities and the smoking gun would be a mushroom cloud over those American cities. Even though the Use of Force Resolution specifically stated that armed invasion was to be the very last option attempted, as soon as it was passed, it became the ONLY option that team Bush considered.

If there was uncertainty about Saddam's stockpiles (and there always were varying degrees of uncertainty about them), and/or if there were no reason to suspect that Saddam would provide tactical support for an organization whose primary goal was his own demise (and there really wasn't, for obvious reasons), then the American people had no reason to demand that their elected representatives vote for such a resolution, and the president had no reason to actually invade Iraq.
Click to expand...


....because if we only talk about Iraq maybe nobody will remember the thread is about Benghazi....../
 
maineman said:
great link... I doubt it will stop any of the Bushlickers from continuing to post the truncated quotes as they have for the past decade. As a matter of fact, I would be amazed if any of them even took the time to read the snopes article, let alone admit what it clearly demonstrates.
Click to expand...

actually, you better read it more closely.....I didn't see any there that didn't underline the need for the war.....
 
NOVA said:
Yes, thanks Rana....I especially liked the Democrats quotes after Bush was elected.....

and they all prove my point that THEY believed Saddam had, was working on, and was stockpiling WMD....just as Bush believed....
Click to expand...

Whoosh!
 
maineman said:
bombing the shit out of him? hardly. He took out a few radar installations. period. shock and awe happened under Dubya.

Team Clinton never tried to convince the American people of the certainty of Saddam's WMD stockpiles and they certainly never tried to convince them about a Saddam/Al Qaeda connection. Those lies were critical to gaining public support and they were ALL team Bush.
Click to expand...


You're wasting your time.

Do you REALLY think after all this time, that clueless, spoonfed kool-aid guzzlers like NOVA are going to listen to ANYTHING other than their precious talking points about the Iraq war?

God could come down from on high right now and speak personally to NOVA, telling him how wrong he was to buy into Bush's bullshit claims of WMD's and how out of context the quotes from Democrats are, and it wouldn't matter because NOVA is driven by his hatred for anything the tiniest bit different from him.
 
Rana said:
Whoosh!
Click to expand...


You didn't actually think if you spoke to a clown like NOVA with any civility that he'd suddenly stop spinning everything and begin believing the truth instead of the same tired bullshit partisan talking points he gets every day from the talking heads on AM radio every day, did you?
 
ZappasGuitar said:
You didn't actually think if you spoke to a clown like NOVA with any civility that he'd suddenly stop spinning everything and begin believing the truth instead of the same tired bullshit partisan talking points he gets every day from the talking heads on AM radio every day, did you?
Click to expand...

I feel bad for him, he thanked my post that blew holes in his post. I guess truncated is a big word!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top