Yale prof confirms what all should have known: Bush did not lie about WMD.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nobody has of yet determined who used them. You know this.
Whatever. Who used them doesn't matter. The fact they were used matters. This could be construed as a humanitarian crisis. Nothing going on in Iraq in 2003 could be construed as such. Until the scum Bush invaded it and turned it into a failed state, that is. The situations are not the same, it is dishonest to compare them.
Whatever. Who used them doesn't matter. The fact they were used matters. This could be construed as a humanitarian crisis. Nothing going on in Iraq in 2003 could be construed as such. Until the scum Bush invaded it and turned it into a failed state, that is. The situations are not the same, it is dishonest to compare them.
LOL, we have to bomb Syria even though we do not even know if they were responsible. Now we are getting somewhere. Why must we bomb Syria?
There would be no humanitarian crises if our enemies had not attacked a country that has done nothing to us. Why do we side with our enemies that created the crises?
Don't ask me, I don't particularly support action in Syria. But I do know the situation is different than that of Iraq 10 years ago.
I love all the double speak, Orwell warned us of it. Iraq was bad because Saddam use chemicals on his people more than two years before bombing him but we are going to bomb Syria because they used them lately. THEY BOTH HAVE OR HAD CHEMICAL WEAPONS AND USED THEM.
By the way the US used chemicals in Vietnam, what do you think napalm was? It fell on people as well as forests and killed them.
As far as torture? Obama doesn't torture he just drops a drone bomb on whoever he wants to, killing everyone else in the area as well as the person he is targeting. Yep, double speak at it's finest.
I love all the double speak, Orwell warned us of it. Iraq was bad because Saddam use chemicals on his people more than two years before bombing him but we are going to bomb Syria because they used them lately. THEY BOTH HAVE OR HAD CHEMICAL WEAPONS AND USED THEM.
No, the situations are different. Iraq was ticking along nicely when the scum Bush invaded it under false pretenses in order to commandeer its resources. There was no situation in Iraq to put an end to through military action. Personally I don't think Syria's troubles are your concern, but these troubles exist. The situations in the two countries are as different as chalk and cheese.
Quote:
By the way the US used chemicals in Vietnam, what do you think napalm was? It fell on people as well as forests and killed them.
Yes, the US's behaviour during your war against Vietnam was deplorable. Not sure how that excuses or explains anything at all, though. Why did you bring it up?
Quote:
As far as torture? Obama doesn't torture he just drops a drone bomb on whoever he wants to, killing everyone else in the area as well as the person he is targeting. Yep, double speak at it's finest.
No, double speak is when flunkies and supporters of the scum Bush tried to pretend torture is just "enhanced interrogation". Not sure what this has to do with the false claim that the situation in Syria is similar to that of Iraq when the scum Bush invaded it under false pretenses in order to commandeer its resources, though.
Whatever. Who used them doesn't matter. The fact they were used matters. This could be construed as a humanitarian crisis. Nothing going on in Iraq in 2003 could be construed as such. Until the scum Bush invaded it and turned it into a failed state, that is. The situations are not the same, it is dishonest to compare them.
War is only bad when a Republican starts one..... eh Canada?
It is only dishonest to compare them because it does not fit with your limited worldview which is that you were sold a bill of goods that Dems were peaceniks...... doesn't it suck when you get stabbed in the back by your friends Seabass?
War is only bad when a Republican starts one..... eh Canada?
Not really. While all Republican decisions are bad decisions, not all bad decisions are Republican decisions.
Quote:
It is only dishonest to compare them because it does not fit with your limited worldview
No. There was no civil war in Iraq until the chaos caused by the scum Bush invading Iraq under false pretenses in order to commandeer its resources.
Quote:
which is that you were sold a bill of goods that Dems were peaceniks...... doesn't it suck when you get stabbed in the back by your friends Seabass?
You're babbling. What I think of what's going on in Syria and what went on in Iraq has nothing to do with the Democrats or Republicans or any other American. One thing was happening in Iraq in 2003, another thing is happening in Syria today. American political parties don't factor into that at all.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
