Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-20-2013, 06:25 PM
 
2,040 posts, read 2,453,097 times
Reputation: 1066

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
That might have some traction if it wasn't so recent in history that we personally experienced it. At the time, I knew it was a lie and so did many others. It was clear that the President was gearing up for war and using classic propaganda techniques to do it.
In other words, even when an investigation called for and headed by Democrats reports that Bush didn't lie, influence, or alter the intelligence.

Even when that report says that the intelligence Bush had, that Congress didn't, painted an even worse picture of Saddam's WMD.

.....YOU know better?

You must have better intelligence contacts than all the intelligence agencies of the USA, GB, France, Germany, and Italy! Amazing!!!

That report was even more recent and you experienced it too. Or, as I suspect, you ignored it because it didn't fit your scapegoating of Bush

Posted with TapaTalk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-21-2013, 05:00 AM
 
Location: Long Island, NY
19,792 posts, read 13,917,756 times
Reputation: 5661
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bludy-L View Post
In other words, even when an investigation called for and headed by Democrats reports that Bush didn't lie, influence, or alter the intelligence.

Even when that report says that the intelligence Bush had, that Congress didn't, painted an even worse picture of Saddam's WMD.

.....YOU know better?

You must have better intelligence contacts than all the intelligence agencies of the USA, GB, France, Germany, and Italy! Amazing!!!

That report was even more recent and you experienced it too. Or, as I suspect, you ignored it because it didn't fit your scapegoating of Bush

Posted with TapaTalk
What democratically headed investigation came to that conclusion?

Study: Bush, aides made 935 false statements in run-up to war - CNN.com
"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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 07:35 AM
 
Location: San Antonio
4,422 posts, read 6,236,296 times
Reputation: 5429
Quote:
Originally Posted by knowledgeiskey View Post
About 10 years ago, I didn't have much internet access to see arguments in the online political community. For those who did, how did conservatives defend GW after no WMDs were found in Iraq?
:
What...just... happened? Is it 2003? I'm in my 20s again!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 10:18 AM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,466,073 times
Reputation: 24780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
More like inaccurate claims.

And many Democrats were making the exact same claims about WMD as Bush was. Were they all "lying?"
They obviously believed the intel that Bush fed them.

Quote:
No spin, just facts. Bush did not "fib" anymore than Clinton did when he sign a bill in 1998 making regime change in Iraq official U.S. policy.

The fact is that Bush & Co cherry-picked the info and only presented the stuff that supported their push for an oil war. And their campaign of BS worked. A majority of the public supported it and so did a majority of congress. But not a majority of congressional Democrats.

Of course, that support evaporated once the truth about Dubya's WMD claims was revealed.

But to this day, some hardcore Dubyites still insist he's some sort of military strategist.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 10:20 AM
 
2,040 posts, read 2,453,097 times
Reputation: 1066
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
What democratically headed investigation came to that conclusion?

.
Goodness....I hate when people don't read any prior posts.

It's only been mentioned here like 5 times. Try post #301.



Posted with TapaTalk
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 10:21 AM
 
Location: Texas
38,859 posts, read 25,466,073 times
Reputation: 24780
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bludy-L View Post
How many times does it take to get through to some folks?

See post #301
See post #334.

Please.



Quote:
You probably voted for Obama/Biden and will probably vote for Hillary in 2016....right?

Well, Biden and Hillary both made impassioned speeches in favor of the Iraq war. They lied then too by your own definition.



Posted with TapaTalk
FYI...

I don't define lie. It has a well known and widely accepted definition already. Biden and Clinton were fed the intel by Bush's CIA. My bet is that both Biden and Clinton went on the assumption that Bush wasn't a lying snake in the grass.

Subsequent events proved that he is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 10:28 AM
 
Location: North America
19,784 posts, read 15,079,987 times
Reputation: 8527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bludy-L View Post
Fabrication?

First.....I could list a long list of Democrats that not only voted for the Iraq invasion, but also made impassioned speeches in favor of it.

Second....even the New York Times and Washington Post advocated for the war.

Third.....there was NO fabrication or massaging of the intelligence. The US Congress held several investigations into that question. The British also investigated that. ALL of the found no evidence of it.

The Silberman-Robb Report (an investigation demanded by Democrats) found nothing to the allegations.

Here's what US News and World Report had to say (reprinted on Real Clear Politics):



RealClearPolitics - Commentary - The (Very) Big Lie by Michael Barone



Posted with TapaTalk

Bush offered them the same misrepresented and cherry picked evidence he gave to the public. Why is this so hard for you guys to understand???
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 10:30 AM
 
Location: North America
19,784 posts, read 15,079,987 times
Reputation: 8527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Seabass Inna Bun View Post
How did they learn all these things? Do they have their own intelligence agencies? Strange to blame people for believing the lies the scum Bush told, but not blame the scum Bush and his fellow torturers for telling them.

What's not strange is right-wingers desperately trying to pretend the failures of the scum Bush are not his fault. When right-wing torture supporters say they believe in personal accountability, what they really mean is they believe in blaming others for right-wing failure, incompetence, and inadequacy.

They keep trotting out the same "well the democrats in congress said it was a good idea" crap and completely forget that they relied on the same false "evidence" as the rest of us did.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 10:33 AM
 
Location: New Mexico
8,396 posts, read 9,426,996 times
Reputation: 4070
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fleet View Post
Isn't it amazing the length some will go to and try to deny facts? Or "spin" as they like to say.

No one in congress ordered our forces to invade Iraq.

It's all on Bush.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-21-2013, 10:35 AM
 
46,892 posts, read 25,860,181 times
Reputation: 29354
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bludy-L View Post
You must have better intelligence contacts than all the intelligence agencies of the USA, GB, France, Germany, and Italy! Amazing!!!
Please. Germany's intelligence service were managing Curveball, and they tried like hell to get the CIA tio understand that he wasn't very trustworthy. The CIA, of course, knew just what the bossman wanted to hear and weren't going to let a bunch of dour Krauts sow doubts in their minds. It was a slam dunk, remember?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 01:58 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top