Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
If you can't admit that Iraq was a mistake, you're one of the last hardcore holdouts. Your opinions are not to be taken seriously as a result.
Worst president of all time? Worse than bush the lesser even??
- Thread starter Bill
- Start date
If you can't admit that Iraq was a mistake, you're one of the last hardcore holdouts. Your opinions are not to be taken seriously as a result.
Superfreak
Verified User
Again... you can't admit it is YOU that is mistaken. YOU claim to be against those actions that help terror groups recruit. So tell us Thing... WHAT would you have done KNOWING that our presence in the mid east to 'contain' (really laughable that you believe he was contained) Saddam was helping recruit the terrorists that struck us on 9/11?
Superfreak
Verified User
Also... stop pretending that it saying 'we should have gone in' is the same as 'there were no mistakes made'.
The Patriots made the right call to go for it on fourth and one in the first quarter. They just didn't execute the play correctly.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
These are my criteria for going to war:
1) Last resort, when ALL OTHER OPTIONS have failed
2) Only when there is a direct threat to the U.S., often defined as a "clear and present danger"
That's the lesson of Iraq. Iraq was a war of choice - and as I think you know, that choice was made by PNAC, in a vain & idealistic attempt to reshape the entire region. That should be unacceptable to every American. This has nothing to do with execution. This has everything to do with when we are willing to sacrifice our bravest - and for that sacrifice, the threshold has to be at its highest and most defined.
No one dies when the Pats go for it on 4th and 1. There is a lower threshold, and the negative consequences of not making it are known ahead of time and quantifiable.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
I keep asking but you seem to be afraid to answer. Tell us a specific question example of what you think a "clear and present danger" is
Why is it so hard for you?
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
quote me the lie you want me to read......I've been through this before......
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
And I keep answering you. A clear & present danger is just that. In Iraq's case, it would have been verifiable WMD's WITH a mechanism & capability to deliver them. Per the NIE just prior to the war (which I asked you to read last time & I guarantee you didn't), Saddam wasn't even a threat to his immediate neighbors.
Now, let's turn it on you: can you tell me what clear & present danger Iraq represented to the U.S. when we invaded in 2003?
Run along, now.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
So by your definition North Korea is a clear and present danger and we should go o war?
They have WMD, with the capability and mechanism to deliver it. And their leader has taken the added step of verbally threatening us.
So you want us to go to war with
North Korea
Russia
Pakistan
China
India
As to your last question, I never said that was my criteria for going to war. So I see no point answering it.
PS
Saddam had WMD.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
You're such a simpleton. And I knew you'd run away from my question. Like - sprint away. You can't handle anything that requires thought.
As for NK, there are still oodles of options on the table, so no - we shouldn't go to war w/ them.
There ya go, dummy. Schooled again.
canceled.2021.1
#AMERICAISDEAD
What are these oodles of options?
You don't think this stuff through you just spout off platitudes.
Fuck I am less interventionist than you. I don't think it is any of our business who else has nukes.
Why do you?
Superfreak
Verified User
People died due to the 'containment' too. 9/11 happened in large part because terrorists groups like Bin Laden were able to recruit based on 'infidels' in the mid east near holy sites. You keep avoiding that one.
It had everything to do with execution. But again, you are caught up in your delusion that containment was 'working'. You avoid any discussion of the negative consequences of said 'containment'. You pretend they don't exist so that you can continue spouting off your holier than thou bullshit.
[h=1]Hans Blix's briefing to the security council[/h]Mr. President, Since I reported to the Security Council on 27 January, UNMOVIC has had two further weeks of operational and analytical work in New York and active inspections in Iraq. This brings the total period of inspections so far to 11 weeks. Since then, we have also listened on 5 February to the presentation to the Council by the US Secretary of State and the discussion that followed. Lastly, Dr. ElBaradei and I have held another round of talks in Baghdad with our counterparts and with Vice President Ramadan on 8 and 9 February....
Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming. The inspections have taken place throughout Iraq at industrial sites, ammunition depots, research centres, universities, presidential sites, mobile laboratories, private houses, missile production facilities, military camps and agricultural sites. At all sites which had been inspected before 1998, re-baselining activities were performed. This included the identification of the function and contents of each building, new or old, at a site. It also included verification of previously tagged equipment, application of seals and tags, taking samples and discussions with the site personnel regarding past and present activities. At certain sites, ground-penetrating radar was used to look for underground structures or buried equipment....
Through the inspections conducted so far, we have obtained a good knowledge of the industrial and scientific landscape of Iraq, as well as of its missile capability but, as before, we do not know every cave and corner. Inspections are effectively helping to bridge the gap in knowledge that arose due to the absence of inspections between December 1998 and November 2002....
More than 200 chemical and more than 100 biological samples have been collected at different sites. Three-quarters of these have been screened using our own analytical laboratory capabilities at the Baghdad Centre (BOMVIC). The results to date have been consistent with Iraq's declarations. We have now commenced the process of destroying approximately 50 litres of mustard gas declared by Iraq that was being kept under UNMOVIC seal at the Muthanna site. One-third of the quantity has already been destroyed. The laboratory quantity of thiodiglycol, a mustard gas precursor, which we found at another site, has also been destroyed....
In my 27 January update to the Council, I said that it seemed from our experience that Iraq had decided in principle to provide cooperation on process, most importantly prompt access to all sites and assistance to UNMOVIC in the establishment of the necessary infrastructure. This impression remains, and we note that access to sites has so far been without problems, including those that had never been declared or inspected, as well as to Presidential sites and private residences....
How much, if any, is left of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and related proscribed items and programmes? So far, UNMOVIC has not found any such weapons, only a small number of empty chemical munitions, which should have been declared and destroyed. Another matter - and one of great significance - is that many proscribed weapons and items are not accounted for. To take an example, a document, which Iraq provided, suggested to us that some 1,000 tonnes of chemical agent were "unaccounted for". One must not jump to the conclusion that they exist. However, that possibility is also not excluded. If they exist, they should be presented for destruction. If they do not exist, credible evidence to that effect should be presented.....
We are fully aware that many governmental intelligence organizations are convinced and assert that proscribed weapons, items and programmes continue to exist. The US Secretary of State presented material in support of this conclusion. Governments have many sources of information that are not available to inspectors. Inspectors, for their part, must base their reports only on evidence, which they can, themselves, examine and present publicly. Without evidence, confidence cannot arise.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2003/feb/14/iraq.unitednations1
I just posted his report and he said nothing of the sort, liar.
It was all lies. All of it.
Lie by Lie: A Timeline of How We Got Into Iraq
[h=3]Mushroom clouds, duct tape, Judy Miller, Curveball. Recalling how Americans were sold a bogus case for invasion.[/h]
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Hell no and he never was. Not in my lifetime. No way Shrub was worse than Nixon.
Now if you believe what professional historians say, and who would be so silly as to believe anyone who actually has professional expertise on a topic? The four worst U.S. Presidents are generally considered James Buchanan, Warren G. Harding, Andrew Johnson and Franklin Pierce.
Cancel 2020.1
Canceled
You said it. I'll never forget - I'm tired of righties trying to re-write the history.
Me too. And I'm tired of the excuses still today, when all the lies are well documented.
Historical rankings of the Presidents. If one takes averages, GW is one of the worst. Perhaps one of the bottom 5.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historical_rankings_of_presidents_of_the_United_States
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Well if you use the average from your source he's 10th worst.
Русский агент
Путин - мl
Hilarious. We aren't supposed to mention Hillary, Bill, or The Obama anymore or we're "obsessed", and here's a Bush-bashing thread.
