First of all, we already knew these existed and posed little to no threat. Clearly you don't know enough about the situation to be talking, which is probably why you sound so ridiculous right now.
Second, these weapons were not the WMDs Bush was talking about. We knew these existed and we knew they weren't a threat. They hadn't been touched since the early 90s... If you a) believed that's what we went to war over or b) would be willing to go to war over those weapons, you're out of your mind.
I think you are missing the point here. This information is nothing new and was know before 2003. No one has really ever argued or debated this information. It doesn't help conservatives or liberals, only the extreme nutjobs on both sides to make some stupid argument.
MarathonMind wrote:
F'ing idiots!!! Try critical thinking some time!
Lol good luck with that! These are the same people who thought herb cain should be president, and don't realize rush limbaugh and bill oreilly are merely performance artists.
I seem to recall good ol' Bill stating on multiple occasions that Iraq possessed WMD's... along with many democrats who supported the war.
Am I wrong?
Democrats are Beth Sullivan loving trash.
Read "A Clean Break" written by the neocons in the 90s.
It will completely explain US foreign policy since 2001
sp2 wrote:
I realize it's way too much to ask of a microcephalous drone like yourself to actually READ the stuff you cite,... and that even if you HAD bothered to read it, your tiny mind would still be far too feeble to grasp the fact that it actually demonstrates exactly the OPPOSITE of your pea-brained claims, but can't you try and do the right thing, just once in your life, anyway?
How does a guy as profoundly stupid as yourself keep his head from collapsing under atmospheric pressure?
Do you stuff it with newspaper?
We know you can't read, we know you can't think, we know that you constitute nothing but a drain on decent society in every possible way,...
Couldn't you just face up to the facts, and kill yourself already?
Just think: with that one act, you would finally, this one single time, make an actual contribution to humanity.
Do it today.
This rant is both on-target and a thing of poignant beauty and I plan to borrow liberally from it the next time I have to put some idiot in his place.
Don't expect the anti-liberal dupes to just disappear conveniently, though. Their entire purpose in life is to swallow bad information unquestioningly and then regurgitate and disseminate it as energetically as they can. They are to social discourse what the bubonic plague once was to public health.
Again, didn't Bill C. state on multiple occasions that Iraq possessed WMD's?
ummmmmmm wrote:
Again, didn't Bill C. state on multiple occasions that Iraq possessed WMD's?
Are you reeally this dense? That Iraq possessed WMDs of some sort is not in question and never was. Much of the reason the U.S. opposed Saddam is because he was gassing Iraqi citizens (Kurds).
The types and reach of the WMDs the U.S. used as a pretext for going to war, however, are a different story.
The original poster is a half-literate rightwing moron who is conflating, be it intentionally or out of a sheer lack of brainpower (probably a mixture of both, but more the latter) WMDs as broadly defined with WMDs that the U.S. could identify as a threat against not only Iraqi citizens but the rest of the world.
Is the distinction really that difficult for some people? How can you even negotiate a typical day managing to feed yourself or wipe your own asses without help (assuming you actually can)?
You're so articulate... lol
Boy did this thread backfire.
Yeah he placed out like the fat kid in dodgeball...
Peaced* not placed???my bad
Liberals hate America wrote:
Bush vindicated (again) ....
Good troll effort until this line. President "My Pet Goat" isn't being "vindicated" with ANYthing happening in Iraq, nor will he ever be.
"The Worst Foreign Policy Decision in History" will keep its title for a lonnnnnnnnnng time. Count on it.
Iraq was a mistake regardless of WMDs. It is hypocritical that Democrats pretend most of them weren't complicit at the time.
Liberals hate America wrote:
OK, retard. If I'm the DEA and I hear that a known drug smuggler is moving a shipment of fresh cocaine tonight and I bust him and find that he is actually shipping old heroin, I'm still in the right. The fact that Bush was right just rubs America-haters wrong.
It's more like you're the DEA, and you hear that a weed dealer (whom you used to supply) is stocking cocaine. Then you raid him, and all you find is weed. Get it now?
I'm pretty sure that the above video is clear that many dems were on the nuclear WMD bandwagon. A whole slew of folks seem to be missing this by rationalizing the "context" of WMD's.
Jus' sayin' wrote:
I'm pretty sure that the above video is clear that many dems were on the nuclear WMD bandwagon. A whole slew of folks seem to be missing this by rationalizing the "context" of WMD's.
You don't need a video to realize that one-- it's historical fact. Though Congress was of course terrible as usual, it's worth remembering that the Bush admin was promoting outright lies as "evidence" at the time.
and, as the video shows, folks like Hillary C. were "outright" supporting the Pres. Sooo, you're saying that she too, is a liar... correct?
Where did everybody go?