-
-
i'm not trying to have anything both ways. i'm stating it's not accurate to conclude from that poll that only the republicans that were polled answered that way.
you'll need to take up your beef with the author of the article you cited. either way, your mind was made up about republicans a long time ago, not mine. i'm free to vote for the candidate that best reflects my interests, regardless of party.Comment
-
there is no reason for drive-by snarks. besides, your post doesn't even make sense for several reasons, the primary being i post my opinion on matters, I choose sides.
besides, i'm not the one trying to label entire groups of people as stupid because they're republican, i'm the one opining that that's not a rational conclusion [based on the poll pointed at].Comment
-
Let's have another investigation. There are still American taxpayer dollars to be spent!Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NYComment
-
It wouldn't make any difference if so many hadn't died. And yes it did happen a long time ago, and Bush was never grilled over it, then or afterwards.
Americans killed in benghazi attack? 4
Americans killed in Iraq war? 4425
Americans killed in Afghan war? 2,326
British killed in Iraq war? 179
British killed in Afghan war? 456
Total Coalition Killed in both 8,206.
And as you point out, Bush was never grilled on why he went into Iraq, took the pressure off Afghanistan and cost the American people $1.6 trillion.
Still the cost of this witch hunt, $20 million, is chicken feed, compared to the cost of Bush's ability to make good decisions.Comment
-
We most definitely should NEVER have invaded Afghanistan or Iraq.
Should have done what Obama finally did and send in a team to take out Bin Laden.
Having said that...you couldn't "Grill" Pres. Bush over Iraq.
Congress voted and approved everything he did.
And one of the people who voted for it was Sen. Hillary Clinton.
George Bush was definitely in charge and leading the way...but Congress approved each and every thing he did.
So for Congress to "grill" Bush...they would have to "grill" themselves too.-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
My understanding is that Bush and his administration cherry picked the information they put out there in regards to Iraq. With this limited information they voted to attack, but may not have if they had all the information. At the very least there should have been an investigation into how the information was gathered and released. By the time we got around to doing that nobody in congress seemed too interested.Comment
-
And this: What The Hell Is The Matter With Iowa? | Crooks and Liars
42% of GOP Caucus goers in Iowa like Ben Carson because he has NO foreign policy experience
Comment
-
I love how people agree that Obamacare is the worst thing since slavery. As if forcing people to take personal responsibility for themselves and get health insurance is the same the same thing as buying another human being and forcing them to work for you and if they get out of line you can beat them to a pulp if you want. . . The two are so similar you almost can't tell them apart.And this: What The Hell Is The Matter With Iowa? | Crooks and Liars
42% of GOP Caucus goers in Iowa like Ben Carson because he has NO foreign policy experience
Comment
-
No, it hasn't been shown at all that ever happened.
Bush was working off of the same exact intel that his predecessor Pres. Bill Clinton was using.
Check out this video montage of Pres. Clinton and his cabinet as well as Democrat Congressmen and Senators discussing how Iraq had WMD's.
Many of these video clips are from the late 1990's before Bush was President.
And the ones when Bush was President were based on bad intel that both Bush and Bill Clinton were getting.
I like to discuss things...but we need to have some truth and less bias in the discussion. Leave your Republican hatred out of it.
We both agree it was a disaster and we should have never went in.
Invading other countries is NOT what the United States is supposed to be doing.
-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
Comment
-
So should he be questioned over how the evidence was discovered and presented. Then why Congress decided to go against what a lot of other countries disagreed with?
There are now emails emerging the Bush and Blair had decided long before the invasion, to invade. IMO the "evidence" is the crime.Comment
-
Comment
-
Did you watch the video I posted?
It's a montage of President Bill Clinton and members of his cabinet in 1998 declaring that Iraq had to be stopped because of "Weapons Of Mass Destruction"
That was being presented to Congress and the public by Bill Clinton BEFORE Bush was President.
See what I'm saying? The U.S. govt. already had Iraq in the crosshairs long before Bush was there.
The "evidence" (there was none by the way...it was all based on intelligence reports from the CIA and the intelligence from other countries as well) was viewed by President Clinton, his cabinet and Democrat & Republican Congress and Senate.
Watch that short video Paul. It's self-explanatory.-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
read an article today in which Tony Blair admits they planned the Iraq invasion based on false information. if Blair knew it, Bush knew it too.
we have all been lied to, the only one that called Rumsfeld out on that in person was the german minister for foreign affairs, theres a video on YoutubeComment
-
No you didn't read any such thing. What you did was hear the headline of a news story from an interview with Blair.
He NEVER says that.
THIS is the story you didn't read:
Tony Blair says he's sorry for Iraq War 'mistakes' - CNN.com
Blair talks about the bad intel and doesn't apologize for ousting Hussein.
Also...Blair was Pres. Bill Clinton's close, close ally. Both were liberal leaders and they were famously close.
Often Blair and Clinton were compared to Reagan and Thatcher in terms of being of a like mind.-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
Just watched it. It displays how ignorant some Americans are. These leaders are clearly building up the fear factor with no real evidence.
And yet. America knows NK has nuclear capabilities and signed a deal with Iran so they can build nuclear reactors from which they can produce enriched plutonium. Both are rogue nations, both have a history of attacking others. NK is on a permanent war footing. Or similar.
We know Saddam was a despot, but he was sensible enough to know that he had best not step out of line. Islam terrorists don't care of retaliation. They know it strengthens their message.
The entire situation makes what happened in Benghazi a side show, add the blatant misleading of the American people and therefore the world. Something more powerful than a Congressional Hearing is imperative.
How many of the people in that video, or the people supplying the intelligence, are still in the job?Comment
-
A law forcing people to pay taxes for the services their country provides is about as sensible as it gets. Fining people who don't pay taxes is norm, sending some to prison happens.
A law forcing people to pay a private company for services they will get over charged for or denied on a technicality, is as insane as it gets. But not unusual if the companies taking the money own the Government. The problem is, the people who don't realise they're being ripped off.Comment
-
They were planning this long before any of us knew. As Robbies video shows there was a movement to invade long before Bush came out with the plan. This shows how we were all misled.
Emails reveal Tony Blair's deal with George Bush over Iraq war was forged before invasion started | Daily Mail Online
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush%E...2003_Iraq_memo
They were going in with or without evidence or UN backing.Comment
-
Robbie it has been outright proven that the Bush admin misled congress. If you can't use google to educate yourself on that very well documented event in our nations history, there is little reason for me to argue it to you.
As I said what the Hilary email showed, is not only did the Bush admin use misleading information to make the case for war, but that Bush and Blair agreed to invade Iraq a full year ahead of any of the BS Bush used to sell the war.
What this means is exactly what people like myself have been saying all along. bush and co wanted to invade Iraq and they cherry picked Intel to make a false case to do it. Turns out that's Exactlly what happened..
Bush, Chenny and the rest of their admin should all be in jail right now..
Bill Clinton on the other hand did not use cherry picked intel to take us into war with Iraq.. Seriously I dunno why you would even try to compare the two as being even remotely the same,In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.Comment
-
196 countries
There are 196 countries in the world today. Taiwan is not considered an official country by many, which would bring the count down to 195 countries. Although Taiwan operates as an independent country, many countries (including the U.S.) do not officially recognize it as one.
Report a suspicious cracker: Click HereComment
-
No crockett, you are only parroting OPINIONS given from the Democrat side...which of course completely are ignoring the video I just posted of Pres. Clinton, his Secretary of State, and others saying in 1998 that Hussein was making WMD's and had to be stopped.
How can you sit there and type that when you can simply watch them SAYING it before Bush was ever President.
As for using "google to educate yourself"...be my guest Einstein. Show me where it has ever been "Proven" by anyone.
It has not. It is simply an attempt by the scumbag politicians to re-write history so they can keep getting elected to Congress and the Senate even though they were part of the whole fiasco themselves and voted for it.
I suppose there just isn't any way to ever keep you from interjecting your political bias no matter what. Even when you can plainly watch and hear Pres. Clinton saying it.
Bush used the same intel.
He was only in office for a year when the illegal and stupid and un-American thing he did (invade another country that had not attacked us).
All the people in place at the CIA and other spy agencies providing the intel were the same ones who were giving Pres. Clinton the same exact information.
But go ahead crockett, "educate" me. Show me ONE link that isn't an OPINION piece and shows what you are trying to claim to be FACT.
You can't. But I'll check back and see if you can. lol
By the way...in hindsight, I think Bush and everyone involved should be hauled before an international court and thrown in prison for that.
BUT, it won't happen because Hillary would go to jail, Reid would go to jail, Pelosi would go to jail, etc.
They ALL agreed and voted on it.
It was the entire Federal govt.
But of course, you won't see that. You love the big govt. and they can do no wrong.-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
Fact is: the intel used to justify the Iraq war was botched (Curveball) and everyone - including Bush and Blair - knew it. They wanted their war, they did it anyways, they lied about the reasons.
Opposed to Afghanistan some countries (the "old" Europe) didnt want to play along this time and got ridiculed for that back then.
We can now discuss forth and back who said what when - but what I wrote above was the direct justification for attacking Iraq - well knowing that Hussein was not part of Al Queida and without any proof for any WMDs.Comment
-
News article from 2008 on the weapons of mass destruction found in Iraq::::
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2...l-weapons.htmlComment
-
In November, you can vote for America's next president or its first dictator.Comment
-
Thanks for posting the proof that they never found what they claimed Saddam had and why they went to war against him.The United States had gone to war declaring it must destroy an active weapons of mass destruction program. Instead, American troops gradually found and ultimately suffered from the remnants of long-abandoned programs, built in close collaboration with the West.Comment
-
So does that mean the Clinton knew it too? And Gore? And Reid, and Pelosi? They were all reading the same intel.
Or are you saying that Bush was somehow smarter than everybody else and knew better than Clinton and the rest? And he is such an evil genius that he was able to trick the entire U.S. Senate and Congress and President Clinton...all before he even took office?
What you're saying is nonsense.
You're getting off the track by being partisan in politics.
YES, Bush should be in jail for going into Iraq. So should Cheney. So should every member of Bush's cabinet that had anything to do with it (Rumsfeld, etc.)
And oh yeah...EVERY member of Congress and the Senate that voted for it and funded it.
Oops...you see THAT is why they will NEVER "grill" Bush.
Everything else you are arguing is irrelevant.
You're just talking in circles. They can't and won't ever prosecute anyone for those illegal wars. Because they ALL had a hand in it. And they ALL made money for their crony's back home in the military industrial complex.
Why do you think that when Pres. Obama took office and had a full Demcrat Senate control and full Democrat Congress control...he didn't do a damn thing?
Well, now you know in case you weren't paying attention (obviously) back in the 1990's and early 2000's.
Fortunately you can just watch that video and now you know.-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
Read the post I just wrote to Ma Dalton.
And I don't have any idea what you are talking about. I am the one in this conversation who keeps saying it was an illegal war and they should all be in prison.
You're the one who keeps grasping at straws.
Such a blind person you are. How in the fuck does a CIA agent try to "tell the truth about the Bush admin faking intelligence" when the intelligence came from the Clinton administration and was already being used BEFORE Bush was President.
Watch the video crockett. Then explain to me how Bush "faked" the intelligence from 1998 that was used.-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
-
You are missing something here Robbie.... At the end of the Clinton administration the US and Iraq were already in a shooting war, with Iraq shooting at US planes enforcing the no fly zones and the US bombing any military site that fired on them. This kind of fighting was happening on a daily basis.
We had a valid and legal reason to invade Iraq, even without WMDs.Herschel Savage
Brooklyn, NYComment
-
Bush's Distortions Misled Congress in Its War Vote - latimes
Bush-era documents show official misled Congress about NSA spying
Senate Intelligence Committee: Bush and Cheney Misled us on Iraq | Alternet
Report Says CIA Misled Congress, White House On Interrogation Program : The Two-Way : NPR
CIA misled Congress about brutal, ineffective terrorist interrogations, Senate report finds | The Japan Times
The problem is relying on documents from people who have to have dangers to warrant their budgets. AND people who will only believe what they want to believe of is in their interest to believe.
No one was looking at the evidence with an open mind, their view was to find problems. And excuses for war.
Some benefitted immensely from the war and were linked to or were decision makers. One person didn't have the intellectual capacity to look at the evidence. And he was the man with his finger on the button.
The No-Fly Zone was another misled idealistic attempt to put a "western Style" leader into power on a barbaric country. The shooting at planes was ineffective and the response to these missiles was. A bully needs only someone bigger than him to keep him in control.
The CIA and NSA are never going to say there's little problems for us to deal with, they will blow problems out of all proportion. To safe guard their budgets.
It only took the corrupt and fools to listen to end in war. In Syria the West needs to understand Assad is the option, or someone like him. We were staying out because we knew the alternative was lots of small factions killing each other to become the next Assad.
Now we are going in because ISIS is worse than him, but still want him out.Comment
-
4.7 million dollars and counting and no "smoking gun".
What lengths the pubs won't go to try to discredit Hillary, who will be our next President, like it or not.
I can't say she's my first choice, but get over it guys, the group you're running out there is laughable. AGAIN!Comment
-
Comment
-
And it shouldn't have mattered anyway.
Everyone knows that when they started screaming about "WMD'S" during the Clinton administration they were talking about NUCLEAR weapons.
Pres. Clinton and Secretary Albright both plainly said that Hussein could be months away from having nukes.
Bush used that same thing.
They tried to change it to "chemical weapons" when they got there and found out that all the hundreds of billions of dollars we waste on spying on everyone...gave nothing but the WRONG intel.
And bottom line...it doesn't matter if they had nukes or didn't have nukes.
The United States doesn't have any authority to invade another country.-Robbie
ClaudiaMarie.ComComment
-
Washington DC is full of corrupt criminals. They were not prosecuting her, it was a hearing that was just a horse and pony show. Everyone talks shit about the Republicans but look at your fearless leader now! This country is in shambles with a race war, and a fucked up immigration setup. Enjoy your Muslim president that you voted for. And enjoy the anal kool aid.Comment
Comment