He had been attacking U.S. Military assets for 12 years and he was in cahoots with Islamic extremists.
You don't pay attention, do you Chumpy?
That'd be great logic if Saddam ever attacked us with WMDs or if he was an Islamic militant.
Please make up your minds whether these things are still out there and we just completely ed up securing them, or if they simply don't exist.
He had been attacking U.S. Military assets for 12 years and he was in cahoots with Islamic extremists.
You don't pay attention, do you Chumpy?
With WMDs?He had been attacking U.S. Military assets for 12 yearsYeah, he planned 9/11.he was in cahoots with Islamic extremists.
I see, so we wait for that to happen?
Really? Where'd you hear that?
Look fellas, just say that he was a bad man that needed to be taken out because we were afraid of him.
Then be consistent with all the other bad men in the world.
You won't need any excuses or make any up then.
With what WMDs? Are you saying they exist now? Have you made up your mind?Look up the word hyperbole.Really? Where'd you hear that?
So, you're contending there was nothing particularly onerous about this bad man?
All those Democrats were wrong too? Even you choice for President -- John Kerry?
Zarqawi fled Afghanistan to Iraq. Abu Nidal was a resident of Baghdad. What other bad men have such close ties to Islamic terrorists?
So he gives them to someone who does.
He certainly had embraced the cause in recent times.or if he was an Islamic militant.
I speak for myself, Honeypie. Recognize that individuals have different opinions and you'll go far.Please make up your minds whether these things are still out there and we just completely ed up securing them, or if they simply don't exist.
I've always believed he had them. And, even if not, one of his top scientists testified that he was prepared to recons ute his WMD program immediately after sanctions were lifted -- and, further, would have some chemical weapons ready to deploy within weeks -- if not days.
Why are you defending him so vehemently?
Yep, I have.
Look up the word idiot...better yet, look in a mirror -- just in case Webster's photo of you is outdated.
I'm still waiting for you to explain all those statements by Democrats who also were convinced -- based on access to the same intelligence the President had -- that Saddam Hussein need to be disarmed.
Bush Lied, People Died!!!!!!
You are the definition of IDIOT!! Those statements were made based on the ty intelligence that Dumbya, Rover, Rummy, Cheney drummed up.
It really is not that difficult. Dumbya won't even acknowledge that the intelligence was screwed up.
Wait a minute? Drummed up or screwed up?
It's possible the intelligence was screwed up and, if so, how can you blame the President for acting on the same "screwed up" intelligence that everyone had and also believed should have been acted on?
But, if you believe it was "drummed" up, you're going to have to explain two things:
1) How did they drum it up during the Clinton administration, and;
2) Where's the proof it was drummed up?
Because, just because you say they lied doesn't make it so. In fact, just the opposite has been concluded -- that the intelligence wasn't manipulated by the administration.
We also haven't even talked about the British, Italian, Australian, and French Intelligence that concluded the same thing.
Dumbya, for the people!!!
And this is as deep as the Left's argument gets.
No proof.
No alternative.
No plan.
Nothing.
You would think that after a few years of this canard, they would have at least provided some support for the bumper sticker argument.
^^^Bush rehearsed questions with a military group!!! That man is a liar, PERIOD!!!
"The Photo Opportunity President", governor Bush![]()
Last edited by SA210; 11-03-2005 at 09:57 PM.
WTF are you on about?
Don't blame me, I voted for Kerry.
Here's another thing to consider...
That " ty" intelligence was provided by George Tenet's CIA. A Clinton appointee, if memory serves me.
Where are they and why didn't we get them?You can't show me defending him one bit so drop that bull once and for all.Why are you defending him so vehemently?Where are they? Are we safer now that we don't know where they are?Yep, I have.You labor under the assumption I am a Democrat and that I voted for Kerry. You really aren't good with this assumption thing, are you?I'm still waiting for you to explain all those statements by Democrats who also were convinced -- based on access to the same intelligence the President had -- that Saddam Hussein need to be disarmed.
So, where's Jimmy Hoffa and why haven't we found him?
Sure you are. You believe him over the rest of the world (caveat: up until the U.S. invaded). You believe he should have been left in power (caveat: After he was removed from power, of course). You believe he was an innocent man who deserved to be left alone (caveat: after he was pulled from the Spider Hole). Before, as we all know, you were just as convinced as the rest that he was evil.
That would, of course, depend on where they are. If destroyed, I'd say yeah -- we're safer. If hidden, possibly not -- unless they're hidden where no one can get to them. If moved...no, they're as much a danger as they were before -- but, no more of a danger.
No, I just assume you're an idiot. But, that's based on pretty strong evidence provided in your posts.
He's under Giants Stadium and no one wants to break up the foundation concrete.So, where's Jimmy Hoffa and why haven't we found him?Nope. I wanted and still want proof.Sure you are. You believe him over the rest of the worldI don't believe he should've been overthrown for bogus reasons.You believe he should have been left in poweryou and your idiocy -- I want something more to go on before committing to killing tens of thousands of people.You believe he was an innocent man who deserved to be left aloneThe mere fact you don't know anything about their existence or whereabouts should make you feel very safe indeed. You are completely comfortable with all that death on your hands on a few ifs and maybes. Good for you. Saddam killed thousands on such whims too.That would, of course, depend on where they are. If destroyed, I'd say yeah -- we're safer. If hidden, possibly not -- unless they're hidden where no one can get to them. If moved...no, they're as much a danger as they were before -- but, no more of a danger.
All I've got to say is that if you had been in charge I'm betting we would have had another attack on U.S. soil and that thousands of us would be dead...because you failed to act.
With what?All I've got to say is that if you had been in charge I'm betting we would have had another attack on U.S. soil and that thousands of us would be dead...because you failed to act.
The weapons that were never there or the weapons that were there and now aren't there and we have not one cluse as to where they are?
I'm all for action -- if it's the right action. Afghanistan was the right action -- and isn't quite finished. Iraq was a distraction to make people like you feel less impotent after 9/11.
All I've got to say is if you were in charge the only person left alive would be Terry Schiavo.
So, you deny he had the scientific minds, precursor chemicals and agents, the physical equipment, and the will to re-cons ute his WMD program as soon as the sanctions were lifted?
Because, at the very least, that's what the evidence shows.
Combine that with the influx of al Qaeda from an embattled Afghanistan, corrupt actions of the UN and our allies probably leading to a premature lifting of sanctions, and his aggressive posturing...I'm cool with the President's decision.
It was the right thing to do.
That wasn't the bill of goods we were sold.So, you deny he had the scientific minds, precursor chemicals and agents, the physical equipment, and the will to re-cons ute his WMD program as soon as the sanctions were lifted?
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction." - Cheney
"Iraq has stockpiled biological and chemical weapons, and is rebuilding the facilities used to make more of those weapons. We have sources that tell us that Saddam Hussein recently authorized Iraqi field commanders to use chemical weapons -- the very weapons the dictator tells us he does not have." - Bush
"His regime has amassed large, clandestine stockpiles of biological weapons—including anthrax and botulism toxin, and possibly smallpox." - Rummy
"There is no doubt that the regime of Saddam Hussein possesses weapons of mass destruction. As this operation continues, those weapons will be identified, found, along with the people who have produced them and who guard them." - Franks
"We know for a fact that there are weapons there." - Fleischer
"It has rebuilt its civilian chemical infrastructure and renewed production of chemical warfare agents, probably including mus , sarin, and VX." - Bolton
“We know where they are. They're in the area around Tikrit and Baghdad and east, west, south and north somewhat.” - Rummy
“We have high confidence that they have weapons of mass destruction. That is what this war was about and it is about.” - Fleischer
“For bureaucratic reasons, we settled on one issue, weapons of mass destruction (as justification for invading Iraq) because it was the one reason everyone could agree on.” - Wolfowitz
You can come back with all the Democratic quotes you like -- there are many and their complete lack of spine on the issue helped to bring about this mess -- but this war wasn't their invention.
I deny he was going to be able to do much of anything with our flying hundreds of sorties over his country with orders to blow up at any sign of so much as a radar lock. The ease with which Iraq was taken over shows just how little a threat he actually posed.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)