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.
Question: Can America go to war without the president's executive decision?
You must be real ashamed of the Iraq war because instead of boasting about it and taking credit for it, you are trying to blame it entirely on the democrats.
More of your party loyalist sickness. It's beyond your capacity to recognize some of us are not partisan party hacks and actually give both or neither party credit or blame. Bush being the #1 culprit doesn't absolve the D's of their role in supporting the War resolution, speaking for it to gather public support, funding it, and flag-waving while it was the popular thing to do.
Is there any reason to believe Gore would not have done the same damn thing? One thing that does not change much over the last 50 years when the opposition party gains the executive branch is our insane interventionist foreign policy.
The War on Iraq should shame every American. The Republicans will take the beat for this & that's fine they deserve it, but the Democrats are equally to blame, anything other than this truth is revisionary or delusional. The Democrats, not the Republicans were the ones who decided "regime change" in Iraq was necessary. Bill Clinton signed the
- Bill, Hillary, Gore, Kerry, Nancy, Biden, et al detailing the need to "disarm" Saddam Hussein, calling for "regime change", talking about his WMD's, chemical weapons, nuclear program & close ties to terrorism/Al Queda.
"When you were a candidate, I called you a corporation running for the Presidency masquerading as a human being. In time you turned a metaphor into a reality. As a corporation, you express no remorse, no shame, no compassion and a resistance to admit anything other than that you have done nothing wrong."- Ralph
That wasn't Bush talking...seriously? Unbelievable that the right wing is still trying to erase the Bush years and the big smelly dump he left behind that will FOREVER be his legacy.
Is there any reason to believe Gore would not have done the same damn thing? One thing that does not change much over the last 50 years when the opposition party gains the executive branch is our insane interventionist foreign policy.
Gore would have been unlikely to fill his cabinet with PNAC goons. But of course you know that.
- Bill, Hillary, Gore, Kerry, Nancy, Biden, et al detailing the need to "disarm" Saddam Hussein, calling for "regime change", talking about his WMD's, chemical weapons, nuclear program & close ties to terrorism/Al Queda.
You can express a sincere desire for regime change without launching a massive invasion and occupation. Doing that was stupid. And for Americans to be so caught up in the pro-war agitprop fed to them by media that completely abandoned their duty to critically examine what they in turn were fed, that was shameful.
Botching the occupation completely was just the cherry on the sh.t sundae. Once the magnitude of the problem of governing Iraq became clear, everybody with enough seniority to do so got the h.ll away and twentysomethings in the Foreign Office were suddenly shouldered with tasks they had no chance in hell of pulling off.
Last edited by Dane_in_LA; 01-04-2014 at 12:32 PM..
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.
