My local bookstore apparently has a political bent.

[Get Down]

Really? Bush lied? and only he lied? Colin Powell didn't lie? The CIA didn't lie? Everyone told the truth but mean ol Bush.

I love you people!

The next thing you're going to say is that Bush knew all along about 9/11 and that he's just buddies with SA's prince! And that we really never landed on the moon! And that Elvis and Abe Lincoln are still alive!

Bush went along with the evidence that was provided. If you want to be angry at anyone, get upset @ the Pentagon. They did one hell of a job communicating with other government agencies in preventing 9/11. There were red flags all over the place yet the Pentagon couldn't get its act together. Then, they give the President and Congress inaccurate information which sends us to war.

Put yourself in Bush's shoes. What does he have to gain by lying to the American people about the war? Does he get enjoyment out of seeing young people die? Does Bush really need more oil when he basically owns all of Texas? I mean seriously, last I checked the Bush family wasn't exactly needing food stamps.

If the CIA tells you that Iraq has WMD, are you really going to dismiss them and tell them that YOU KNOW better?

It's a pretty sweet double edge sword you Bush Bashers have. You bash him for not being more involved in preventing 9/11. Then you bash him for being too involved and sending us to war.

So which is it libs? That's okay, Obama's promises will save us. He'll pay for my mortgage and all will be well...

it's as if i opened my philosophy 101 textbook to the chapter on logical fallacies, holy moly this post

 

[Deleted member 365]

it's as if i opened my philosophy 101 textbook to the chapter on logical fallacies, holy moly this post

Then why don't you?

I could go into my economics 101 textbook and show how awful Barack Hussein Obama is.

Saying you have a textbook don't mean nothing.

 

[One Brow]

Really? Bush lied?

It was worse than lying. From what I could tell, Bush was convinced of the truth of astatement regardless of evidence, and nothing was going to dissuade him from his conviction. We got into a war because he uses religious thinking for all of his decisions.

 

[Deleted member 365]

It was worse than lying. From what I could tell, Bush was convinced of the truth of astatement regardless of evidence, and nothing was going to dissuade him from his conviction. We got into a war because he uses religious thinking for all of his decisions.

Evidence? What evidence? LOL you libs sure have selective hearing.. Listening.. Or learning.. or something!

The evidence brought to the United Nations (you know, that group of socialist nations that sucks our resources) all pointed to Saddam having WMD. If Saddam really didn't have any, then why was he so touchy about letting weapons inspectors in? Why resist when you have nothing to hide?

It's funny, Bush takes the fall for you libs. Yet, the other points remain unaddressed by your ilk.

Bush was blamed for not doing enough to prevent 9/11. He then takes steps to attack our enemies and rid the world of a tyrant, and he's blamed again by your cult.

Can he do anything right?

And you people are right. BUSH lied. And only bush. This never happened:

Neither did this:

Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States.

Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-CT, September 4, 2002

Or this:

If we wait for the danger to become clear, it could be too late.

Sen. Joseph Biden D-Del., September 4, 2002

Or this:

We know that Saddam Hussein is determined to keep his weapons of mass destruction, is determined to make more.

Colin Powell February 5, 2003

Or this:

I have no doubt we're going to find big stores of weapons of mass destruction.

Kenneth Adelman, Defense Policy Board , March 23, 2003

Or this:

Iraq both poses a continuing threat to the national security of the United States and international peace and security in the Persian Gulf region and remains in material and unacceptable breach of its international obligations by, among other things, continuing to possess and develop a significant chemical and biological weapons capability, actively seeking a nuclear weapons capability, and supporting and harboring terrorist organizations.

Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-NY, February 5, 2003

But that's ok, Bush lied and only he lied. None of the Libs lied. None of the libs were for the Iraqi War.

We should have kicked Bush out and voted this guy in:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=esUTn6L0UDU

 

[Deleted member 365]

My point is, Bush takes the fall for everything. From the Iraqi War to steroids in baseball... Hell, we could probably blame the TCU blowout of Utah on Bush if we wanted to.

But if we are to make any progress, we need to realize that there were more people wrong/corrupt than just Bush.We need to realize that the war in Iraq and the complete mismanagement of Afghanistan isn't just a Bush thing... A Republican thing... But a federal government thing. Both Demos and Repubs have failed.

We need to realize that both political parties are bought and paid for by special interest and lobbyists. They're the same coin, just two different sides.

 

[One Brow]

Evidence? What evidence? LOL you libs sure have selective hearing.. Listening.. Or learning.. or something!

The evidence brought to the United Nations (you know, that group of socialist nations that sucks our resources) all pointed to Saddam having WMD.

I watched Powell's prsentation. I was unconvinced. I thought the evidence was flimsy, and only someone who was already convinced Hussein had weapons would think the evidence supported anything.

Must've just been my selective hearing. After all, look at all the WMDs we actually found.

I just said I don't think Bush lied. Powell, perhaps.

Democrats were quite clear they were relying on what the President presented to them (while looking at the poll numbers as well, no doubt).

 

[Deleted member 365]

Democrats were quite clear they were relying on what the President presented to them (while looking at the poll numbers as well, no doubt).

Excellent point.

So why don't Demos take some of the fall? Or any? When are Demos going to take responsibility for anything? The economy has sucked under their watch. They never even tried taking Osama Bin Laden (when they had chances in the 90s). They blame Bush and the Repubs for the wars, yet they went right along with them, hook, line, and sinker.

The bitter taste of defeat, what irony now. The Demos are now being blamed for some Republican failed policies (which deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy did) contribute to our present economic situation.

Hilarious how this system works.

 

[Deleted member 365]

Serious statement now, I hate the wars. I don't think we should have ever invaded Iraq. I think Bush sucked.

But the Demos share so much blame in this. They went along with everything. They were afraid of the polls. They were afraid of being labeled Frenchies or unAmerican.

Yet, the blame is always placed on ONE person, Bush.

Colin Powell?
Paul Wolfewitz?
Rumsfeld?
And many bigtime Democratic senators (several of which with white house ties such as Biden and Clinton)?

Yet, bush takes all the blame for the government's incompetence/lack of courage

 

[One Brow]

I agree Congress should share much of the blame.

As for the President's staff, it is customary for the President to take responsiblity for acting on their advice.

 

[TheItinerantSon]

so even if we went into iraq on mistaken premises, but the world is a safer, more stable, and less noxious place than it would be had we not gone, and thousands upon thousands of iraqi lives were saved....then whats the fuss about?

 

[GVC]

so even if we went into iraq on mistaken premises, but the world is a safer, more stable, and less noxious place than it would be had we not gone, and thousands upon thousands of iraqi lives were saved....then whats the fuss about?

Unfortunately, we have to deal with the reality that the world isn't safer, and we've contributed to the killing and displacement of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis (far more than Saddam had any similar negative effect on).

Unlike naive fantasies, reality can be a bitch.

 

[TheItinerantSon]

how many people died annually by saddam's hands during saddam's reign v. how many people died per year in the last seven years.

The math is favorable.

Further, Saddam was not going to live forever, and its likely that upon his death the country would have been engulfed in a much more severe and much bloodier civil war than ever before.



I bet when GW dies, it will be an official day of mourning in Arbil. I wouldnt be surprised if theres a bronze statue of him there in 20 years