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.
It is too funny those that have been so brainwashed to think this was all GW. Bush and Dick Cheney.
There were democrat house representatives on the intelligence committee.
This was not an executive order.
Congress actually had a vote.
This was not a Partisan vote.
I think Ron Paul was the only one to vote NO. LOL!
The ability to rewrite history, can only take place, when those alive when it happened are dead.
Let me post this one more time... congress relied upn the SAME fabricated evidence Bush offered to the public. If Bush had told them that Clinton's operation Desert Fox had taken out the WMDs, do you think for one minute congress would have given him the go-ahead? If the fact that Saddam had nada to do with al Qaeda nor the attacks on 9/11, do you think congress would have given him the go ahead?
What planet are you from? Read the carnegie report, the link is below, and educate yourself.
It is common knowledge(except for those blindly caught up in left wing propaganda, or the relatively uninformed - both groups overlapping) that the weapons were sent over the border to Syria in the run-up to the invasion forced by the mamby-pamby Democrats.
That is more than "justification" it is the inconvenient truth for liberals who hate President Bush and wish to slander the man who kept us safe.
Grow a conscience.
Grow a brain .... even Bush and Clan admitted that there were no WMD's after the fact ... blaming inaccurate intelligence as the culprit, rather than admit to outright lying us into war.
The sad facts are, the US provided Iraq with it's chem-bio capability to use against the Iranians. After that, we tricked Hussein into invading Kuwait, providing a pretext for the US to decimate and decapitate the Iraqi military we helped build. And whatever chem-bios were there at the start of the 1st gulf war, were destroyed during the operation, along with Iraq's capability to wage any form of effective military action or be a threat to anyone.
The intelligence community knew this ... the international weapons inspection teams knew this, and Bush and Clan knew this.
Let me post this one more time... congress relied upn the SAME fabricated evidence Bush offered to the public. If Bush had told them that Clinton's operation Desert Storm had taken out the WMDs, do you think for one minute congress would have given him the go-ahead? If the fact that Saddam had nada to do with al Qaeda nor the attacks on 9/11, do you think congress would have given him the go ahead?
What planet are you from? Read the carnegie report, the link is below, and educate yourself.
Read the Carnegie report? Good lord. Let me tell you this .... those of us from planet earth understand a few things you apparently don't. First ... Clinton's operation? Give me a break ... Desert Storm was a Bush Senior operation, and orchestrated by the Bush crime family through deception and double cross, with Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie and Sec. Baker running point on the operation.
The hidden in plain sight truth that you will never get from the controlled mass media is that Kuwait was cross drilling, stealing Iraqi oil, just as was alleged by Iraq and the main subject of the dispute. Iraq, in the final stage leading up to the invasion, placed troops on the Kuwaiti border. Ambassador Glaspie was instructed by Baker to communicate a clear message to Saddam Hussein that the United States had no interest in the dispute, and considered it an Arab issue only. This was the wink-wink ... nod .. nod .. tacit green light for Hussein to invade Kuwait ... and he was dumb enough to take the bait. After all, the US had encouraged him in the invasion of Iran, so he just didn't realize the political agenda was to create a pretext for the US to neuter his military capability after it was no longer useful to American interests. The rest, most everyone knows.
Read the Carnegie report? Good lord. Let me tell you this .... those of us from planet earth understand a few things you apparently don't. First ... Clinton's operation? Give me a break ... Desert Storm was a Bush Senior operation, and orchestrated by the Bush crime family through deception and double cross, with Ambassador to Iraq, April Glaspie and Sec. Baker running point on the operation.
The hidden in plain sight truth that you will never get from the controlled mass media is that Kuwait was cross drilling, stealing Iraqi oil, just as was alleged by Iraq and the main subject of the dispute. Iraq, in the final stage leading up to the invasion, placed troops on the Kuwaiti border. Ambassador Glaspie was instructed by Baker to communicate a clear message to Saddam Hussein that the United States had no interest in the dispute, and considered it an Arab issue only. This was the wink-wink ... nod .. nod .. tacit green light for Hussein to invade Kuwait ... and he was dumb enough to take the bait. After all, the US had encouraged him in the invasion of Iran, so he just didn't realize the political agenda was to create a pretext for the US to neuter his military capability after it was no longer useful to American interests. The rest, most everyone knows.
I mispoke (or typed), I meant Desert FOX. Look that one up while you're googling.
And, read my response again, Iraq was invaded based upon fabricated evidence. I think we agree, here.
Let me post this one more time... congress relied upn the SAME fabricated evidence Bush offered to the public. If Bush had told them that Clinton's operation Desert Storm had taken out the WMDs, do you think for one minute congress would have given him the go-ahead? If the fact that Saddam had nada to do with al Qaeda nor the attacks on 9/11, do you think congress would have given him the go ahead?
What planet are you from? Read the carnegie report, the link is below, and educate yourself.
Did you read your own link? I have. There was no "fabricated evidence." What there was was poor intel, and lots of it. From your own link:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Carnegie Endowment
Prior to 2002, most national and international officials and experts believed that Iraq likely had research programs and some stores of hidden chemical or biological weapons and maintained interest in a program to develop nuclear weapons.
What was this fabricated evidence, and who fabricated it? I guess you could say that Saddam fabricated the lie that he still had WMD via his 'deterrence through doubt' stratagem. Is that what you mean? I somehow doubt it--I suspect that would not at all comport with your preferred narrative.
Conservatives quite strongly deny there is global warming, so they might as will deny it's true that viable WMD were never found in Iraq.
Denying that it matters is not the same as denying that it happened.
The blind partisan hacks in this issue are the liberals, not the conservatives. The liberals are the ones going from no WMD found to Bush lied in order to start a war.
Intelligence reports said there were WMD. Saddam did his level best to prevent any accurate inspection to disprove that. Saddam was known to have used illegal weapons both in the Iran-Iraq war and in suppressing unrest within Iraq. We then invaded and found none. Those are the facts. There is no evidence that those reports were fabricated and every reason to believe WMD were there given the intelligence information and Saddam's past behavior.
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?
Hello,
I am a conservative, and I do not have to defend anything, as I was firmly against any action in Irag.
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.
