WOW! a new low for Carville, and he is already pretty low!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Rana said:
Charles A. Duelfer, whom the Bush administration chose to complete the U.S. investigation of Iraq's weapons programs, said Hussein's ability to produce nuclear weapons had "progressively decayed" since 1991. Inspectors, he said, found no evidence of "concerted efforts to restart the program."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A12115-2004Oct6.html
Click to expand...


Whats your point ?.....what was believed in previous years has nothing to do with what is discovered in future years....nothing

Does that simple logic confuse you ?
 
NOVA said:
Its dated Aug. 1995......clearly the quotes I posted by prominent Democrats (and others I didn't post,) were all quotes from 1996 thru 2003....

So why ask me about not believing Kamel....does it sound to you like the "prominent" Democrats in question, including Bill Clinton, believed Kamel....

Clinton and his entire administration should have known about the document you present....why did they see fit lie about the wmd for the next 6 or 7 years.....?

So if you think its evidence of something, try asking why those quotes were ever uttered in spite of it...by Democrats....
obviously, no one believed Kamel's claims or all those Democrats were liars and kept lying even in 2003.....

Knowing you are claiming something is true, that is untrue, is a lie.....NOT knowing, is just being wrong.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And what it comes down to is, your Kamel claim is irrelevant to the discussion.....the discussion remains did those quotes from Democrats I posted
prove that they believed Saddam possessed wmd or were they lying the entire country since Clinton was president ?

....its undeniable that that is what they said, that is what they claimed, and there is no ambiguity in those quotes...
Click to expand...

The document wasn't declassified until the mid 2000s and even then it took the NSA six years to get it. But I agree that both Clinton and bush should have known about it beforehand, if not Congress. And, Clinton wasn't looking for preemptive war on Iraq even if he did indeed know about the document in the '90s. Clinton supported sanctions. But there's no excuse for bush because in his rush to war he ignored anything and anyone that stood in his way.
 
NOVA said:
Whats your point ?.....what was believed in previous years has nothing to do with what is discovered in future years....nothing

Does that simple logic confuse you ?
Click to expand...

One point could be that you don't act before your proof is undisputed; you know, the same arguments you righties are making against air strikes on Syria.
 
Why is it that the english language seems so difficult for people to understand? "I personally have no doubt" means something completely different than "There is no doubt".

All the tap dancing and obfuscation in the world won't change that fact. The Bush administration LIED about the absolute certainty of Saddam's WMD stockpiles and they LIED about Saddam's supposed connections to AQ and to 9/11 and the conflation of those two lies MISLED our nation into a war with Iraq that should not and ought to have not be waged. Period. End of story.
 
maineman said:
Why is it that the english language seems so difficult for people to understand? "I personally have no doubt" means something completely different than "There is no doubt".

All the tap dancing and obfuscation in the world won't change that fact. The Bush administration LIED about the absolute certainty of Saddam's WMD stockpiles and they LIED about Saddam's supposed connections to AQ and to 9/11 and the conflation of those two lies MISLED our nation into a war with Iraq that should not and ought to have not be waged. Period. End of story.
Click to expand...


Whats the difference, the person speaking is making the claim....no one speaks for every person in the world, they speak for themselves.....or in the case a president,
they speak for what his administration in concluding from the best available evidence.


All the tap dancing in the world won't change the FACT that most prominent Democrats believed that Saddam was in possession of wmd for decades....right up to
the time those dems were making those quotes.....
and THEY weren't lying any more that Bush........

well into 2003.....just like the NIE said....caveats and all.....
Solid proof ?.....No....just the best available intelligence and the fact of dead Kurds and Iranians......just the way it works today with the moron you elected and
his 'solid beliefs', which lacks 'solid proof', just dead bodies.......same thing, different day, different president, different party and suddenly different beliefs from the pinheads.
 
Dems were war mongering when it was convenient, when it came time for reelection they bailed to appease their kook fringe voters like code pink, and the rest of the peace-nicks. Period
 
NOVA said:
Whats the difference, the person speaking is making the claim....no one speaks for every person in the world, they speak for themselves.....or in the case a president,
they speak for what his administration in concluding from the best available evidence.


All the tap dancing in the world won't change the FACT that most prominent Democrats believed that Saddam was in possession of wmd for decades....right up to
the time those dems were making those quotes.....
and THEY weren't lying any more that Bush........

well into 2003.....just like the NIE said....caveats and all.....
Solid proof ?.....No....just the best available intelligence and the fact of dead Kurds and Iranians......just the way it works today with the moron you elected and
his 'solid beliefs', which lacks 'solid proof', just dead bodies.......same thing, different day, different president, different party and suddenly different beliefs from the pinheads.
Click to expand...

again... anyone who claimed there was absolute certainty about the existence of Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's was a LIAR. Pure and simple. Bush lied about that. And his team lied about the supposed alliances between Iraq and AQ. THose two lies convinced Americans to support Bush's plan to invade Iraq even before Blix could tell them what we now know: Saddam did NOT have stockpiles of WMD's... which, by the president's own words, was the primary reason for the invasion in the first place.
 
maineman said:
again... anyone who claimed there was absolute certainty about the existence of Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's was a LIAR. Pure and simple. Bush lied about that. And his team lied about the supposed alliances between Iraq and AQ. THose two lies convinced Americans to support Bush's plan to invade Iraq even before Blix could tell them what we now know: Saddam did NOT have stockpiles of WMD's... which, by the president's own words, was the primary reason for the invasion in the first place.
Click to expand...

what we know is they were probably moved to syria
 
maineman said:
again... anyone who claimed there was absolute certainty about the existence of Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's was a LIAR. Pure and simple. Bush lied about that. And his team lied about the supposed alliances between Iraq and AQ. THose two lies convinced Americans to support Bush's plan to invade Iraq even before Blix could tell them what we now know: Saddam did NOT have stockpiles of WMD's... which, by the president's own words, was the primary reason for the invasion in the first place.
Click to expand...

absolute certainty about the existence of Saddam's stockpiles of WMD's?

The very same claim made by numerous high level Democrats over the previous 8 years, including Bill Clinton and Al Gore....so whats you point about
continually only naming Bush.....?.....They all said it, they all believed it and you ignore those facts.....
Those quotes were selling conflict with Saddam for almost a decade before Bush decided to finally act.
Clinton had already dropped over a million lbs. of bombs on Iraq before Bush was elected....thats already war by any definition

Eight years of what you claim to be lying....ALL from Democrats....but you single out Bush and ignore the rest.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top