Republican Candidates

[tarball]

I had no compassion for Saddam Hussein, I applauded the act of hanging a rope around his neck & letting him swing.
But we as Americans should never allow or try justifying a President that will stone face Lie to The American People. Provide false documentation to its elected officials or use the news media against its own people. Use knowingly false information to lead them into a war, for Iraq's resources. If we allow such acts against our country & its people. It will destroy the moral fiber of our great Nation, which is the backbone of America.
At the time of invasion in 2003, Iraq was no more of a threat to America then Venezuela is now. The world knew this, that's why the United Nations voted against the Invasion, The security Council Voted against the Invasion, The arab league Voted against the Invasion & most European countries were against the Invasion. Hell all the world told Bush not to attack Iraq.
It is true that Saddam kicked out the UN inspectors & 3 yrs passed without inspection. But the Nations of the world new Iraq didn't have WMD, because it would of been them that sold Iraq the material for the manufacture of such weapons & they didn't. They acknowledged the sanctions against Iraq & upheld the sanctions against Iraq, while withholding such materials from a known radical leader. The Bush administration new this, & knowing lied to the American people, its democracy & the United Nations to justify a unjust war.
Why anyone would support Bush at this day & time is beyond me. Being Red,White,& blue patriotic is fine, but we must never lose our perspective & allow our patriotism to be taken advantage of so easily. Otherwise there will never be a need for America, its democracy, or its moral fiber. Which is what makes our nation so great in the eyes of the world.

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
I wonder if the same independent journalists counted how many "lies" the Democrats said about WMD's?
Doesn't change the fact Bush lied to start a war. That's a fact. No matter how you try to twist it the fact doesn't change.

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
I wonder who the non-profit organization was? Notice they don't list that...just the findings....
Same comment

 

[stdreb27]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Doesn't change the fact Bush lied to start a war. That's a fact. No matter how you try to twist it the fact doesn't change.
Your argument saying that bush lied, is seriously flawed. You have to assume that he knowingly mislead the people by saying that there were WMD's. (which they did find btw- the only problem was they were stored and not actively being made) Second, you have to ignore what every major intellegence agency in the world was reporting.
Third you have to ignore that his position on WMD's was the same as the previous administration.
So in order for your "bush lied" argument to hold water, we have to assume that one bush intentionally mislead the people for some reason. Second he convinced every major intellegence agency in the world to go along with him, as well as an opposing party's sitting president while he was a governer in texas.
WOW, if he can do that, we should all marvel at his magnificent manipulation skills.

 

[reefraff]

A mind is a terrible thing to waste

The world knew they had no wmd? How about a link to any statement from those countries on the UN security council that opposed the invasion of Iraq saying they had no WMD's as a reason for their opposition?
In fact the only person of any real note to make that claim was former weapons inspector Scott Ritter who damaged his credibility by taking money from Saddam to produce a documentary.

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Doesn't change the fact Bush lied to start a war. That's a fact. No matter how you try to twist it the fact doesn't change.

may want to read this, I was just shown it. Sheds a LOT of light on the story a lot is speculation based off evidence and nothing is concrete, but it does show...Bush did NOT lie.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926630/posts

 

[tarball]

Bush refused allowable time for the UN inspectors to finish the their job when allowed back in for inspections of WMDs. What does that say. It says Bush new there was a high probablity of no WMD to be found. Bush had plans of the invasion. Period. The fact he said he would pull troops out of Iraq after inspections, proves of his intent to stay.
Its so pathetic ? This administration has been mired in scandal after scandal, corruption, abuse of power, lies and deception and yet here we are, still waiting for something to be done about it. Sadly, I've all but given up hope of this administration EVER being held accountable for anything they do. Every scandal that arises seems to end up buried in a mountain of BS designed to confuse the issues at hand until the knatlike attention span of Americans shift to the new "shiny object" of the day.

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Doesn't change the fact Bush lied to start a war. That's a fact. No matter how you try to twist it the fact doesn't change.

Doesn't change the fact Clinton Lied to bomb a couple factories in Iraq.......or was he telling the truth?

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Bush refused allowable time for the UN inspectors to finish the their job when allowed back in for inspections of WMDs. What does that say. It says Bush new there was a high probablity of no WMD to be found. Bush had plans of the invasion. Period. The fact he said he would pull troops out of Iraq after inspections & has not proves of his intent to stay.
Its so pathetic ? This administration has been mired in scandal after scandal, corruption, abuse of power, lies and deception and yet here we are, still waiting for something to be done about it. Sadly, I've all but given up hope of this administration EVER being held accountable for anything they do. Every scandal that arises seems to end up buried in a mountain of BS designed to confuse the issues at hand until the knatlike attention span of Americans shift to the new "shiny object" of the day.

Refused allowable time? Dude Read my link....then post.
Allowable time, Why give them more time when each time they went in the were refused or kicked out....Try putting the blame on Sadaam, if he had no weapons, all he had to do was open his doors and be cooperative, something he never was.
Read the link...you might learn something other than what the washington post and new york times opinion editorials have said.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Tarball
.... But the Nations of the world new Iraq didn't have WMD, because it would of been them that sold Iraq the material for the manufacture of such weapons & they didn't. ....
This is where the "Bush lied" mantra falls apart....
Facts:
First off, President Clinton, in 1998 said each of the following:
*"The policies and actions of the Saddam Hussein regime continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, as well as to regional peace and security.."
*"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
*"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
*"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."
President Clinton's Sec. of State in 1998 said "Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright"
Nancy Pelosi, also in 1998 said "As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
Your comment that the world new Saddam didn't have WMD's is totally uninformed. The Intelligence Agencies of Britain, Germany, Russia, France, Israel and China (and lots more) all said Iraq had WMDs and was aquiring more.

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
Doesn't change the fact Clinton Lied to bomb a couple factories in Iraq.......or was he telling the truth?
Clinton didn't lie about bombing unknown facilities in Iraq? Once again though, they were wrong about the intelligence weren't they? Just blew up some building, they had nothing to do with WMDs. But whats your point. Sending a cruise missile vs the actions of Bush are completely different & its absurd to compare them.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Bush refused allowable time for the UN inspectors to finish the their job when allowed back in for inspections of WMDs. ...
Again, uninformed..
Saddam was given more than 6 months... We told him for 6 months we were coming if he didn't quit playing games with the inspectors.

 

[1journeyman]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Clinton didn't lie about bombing unknown facilities in Iraq? Once again though, they were wrong about the intelligence weren't they? Just blew up some building, they had nothing to do with WMDs. But whats your point. Sending a cruise missile vs the actions of Bush are completely different & its absurd to compare them.
Hehe...
Since you didn't seem to read my post... Here is what President Clinton said:
"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."
Unknown factories? That's not what he said....
The Intel may have been flawed on WMDs in Iraq. If so, Saddam pulled off one of the greatest intelligence coups since D-Day. He had EVERYONE fooled... from President Clinton, to the leading Democrats in Congress, to every major Intel Agency in the world, to the current Administration.

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
may want to read this, I was just shown it. Sheds a LOT of light on the story a lot is speculation based off evidence and nothing is concrete, but it does show...Bush did NOT lie.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1926630/posts
This may shed some light.. It is a study documenting false statements made by Bush Administration since 911 in regard to Iraq War.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups..."In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003," reads an overview of the examination, conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism.
...
The quotes in the study include an August 26, 2002, statement by Cheney to the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction," Cheney said. "There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Lies... what proof did they actually have?

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
This is where the "Bush lied" mantra falls apart....
Facts:
First off, President Clinton, in 1998 said each of the following:
*"The policies and actions of the Saddam Hussein regime continue to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States, as well as to regional peace and security.."
*"The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow." -- Bill Clinton in 1998
*"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
*"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."
President Clinton's Sec. of State in 1998 said "Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright"
Nancy Pelosi, also in 1998 said "As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." -- Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998
"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998
Your comment that the world new Saddam didn't have WMD's is totally uninformed. The Intelligence Agencies of Britain, Germany, Russia, France, Israel and China (and lots more) all said Iraq had WMDs and was aquiring more.

Why did, Germany, France, Russia, China, vote against the Invasion, & insist inspectors be givin more time?

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Clinton didn't lie about bombing unknown facilities in Iraq? Once again though, they were wrong about the intelligence weren't they? Just blew up some building, they had nothing to do with WMDs. But whats your point. Sending a cruise missile vs the actions of Bush are completely different & its absurd to compare them.

You keep skipping over the fact that every major intelligence agency in the world agreed with Bush's statements. Did they lie?
also, actually Sadaam had from 1991 till 2003 to disarm and provide proof, how much more time did we need to give him?

 

[rylan1]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Why did, Germany, France, Russia, China, vote against the Invasion, & insist inspectors be givin more time?
Another question... Why did Colin Powell resign at a time you would think we could use his input and experience most?

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by Rylan1
This may shed some light.. It is a study documenting false statements made by Bush Administration since 911 in regard to Iraq War.
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President Bush and his top aides publicly made 935 false statements about the security risk posed by Iraq in the two years following September 11, 2001, according to a study released Tuesday by two nonprofit journalism groups..."In short, the Bush administration led the nation to war on the basis of erroneous information that it methodically propagated and that culminated in military action against Iraq on March 19, 2003," reads an overview of the examination, conducted by the Center for Public Integrity and its affiliated group, the Fund for Independence in Journalism.
...
The quotes in the study include an August 26, 2002, statement by Cheney to the national convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars.
"Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction," Cheney said. "There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us."
Lies... what proof did they actually have?
The study is based off the angle that Bush and the administration were lying about WMDs in the first place. The study no where shows or proves he was. Again, every intelligence agency in the modern world confirmed Sadaam had WMDs. Why do you keep skipping over that, and did you read my link at all? Doubt it as it is very long and a lot of information.

 

[tarball]

Originally Posted by 1journeyman
Hehe...
Since you didn't seem to read my post... Here is what President Clinton said:
"Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."
Unknown factories? That's not what he said....
The Intel may have been flawed on WMDs in Iraq. If so, Saddam pulled off one of the greatest intelligence coups since D-Day. He had EVERYONE fooled... from President Clinton, to the leading Democrats in Congress, to every major Intel Agency in the world, to the current Administration.
It was unknown facilities, Why because they weren't nuclear, chemical, or biological facility. Do think if they were fully functional facilities, Clinton would of had them destroyed

What do you think the civilian casualty count would of been.

 

[darthtang aw]

Originally Posted by Tarball
Why did, Germany, France, Russia, China, vote against the Invasion, & insist inspectors be givin more time?
If you read my link you might actually learn why they may have voted the way they did......but reading something longer than a paragraph of information appears to be to much for you and Rylan. Continue to be uninformed and rehash the standard Bush lied comment