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 02-15-2015, 08:49 AM
Status: "Days like this I think to myself "I hate living in Georgia"." (set 8 days ago)
 
47,712 posts, read 45,328,902 times
Reputation: 15239

Advertisements

I voted for him in 2004, and I don't miss him at all. I have no pining for the days when he was in office.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-15-2015, 09:06 AM
 
Location: Texas
26,632 posts, read 11,166,324 times
Reputation: 6110
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
Post all the gibberish you wish. There was no lie about WMD. When we invaded Iraq in 2003, it was generally agreed in the world that he still had WMD. Even Saddam's own senior officers believed it.
Yale prof confirms what all should have known: Bush did not lie about WMD.

And don't try to move the goal posts. What was the lie? I want quotes, names, and dates.
Don't you think it's strange that even though they never saw them they still commented? And so what if he ended up actually having WMD? Many countries do.


On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam’s inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction - Salon.com

"The information we had in the intelligence committee was not the same information being given to the American people. I couldn't believe it," Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, said Wednesday when talking on the Senate floor about the run-up to the Iraq war in 2002.
"I was angry about it. [But] frankly, I couldn't do much about it because, in the intelligence committee, we are sworn to secrecy. We can't walk outside the door and say the statement made yesterday by the White House is in direct contradiction to classified information that is being given to this Congress."


Durbin kept silent on prewar knowledge*-*Nation/Politics*-*The Washington Times, America's Newspaper
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 09:13 AM
 
Location: Texas
26,632 posts, read 11,166,324 times
Reputation: 6110
Quote:
Originally Posted by green_mariner View Post
I voted for him in 2004, and I don't miss him at all. I have no pining for the days when he was in office.
Even after the no more nation building nonsense you still voted for him?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 11:20 AM
 
Location: Midwest
31,114 posts, read 19,537,193 times
Reputation: 7767
Quote:
Originally Posted by Repubocrat View Post
I really do. Every time there was a press conference, it was always entertaining to watch him. The guy had a personality, a sense of humor and had this folksy way of communicating with the American people.

Obama on the other hand, has no sense of humor. His speeches are mostly robotic, anyways, he is nothing more than a George Soros puppet
Perhaps you could just watch an old comedy show, perhaps the three stooges.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 11:44 AM
 
Location: Central Illinois -
21,409 posts, read 14,299,973 times
Reputation: 14531
Quote:
Originally Posted by jojajn View Post
Perhaps you could just watch an old comedy show, perhaps the three stooges.


Woop, woop, woop….(nyuk, nyuk, nyuk…)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 12:00 PM
 
Location: Midwest
31,114 posts, read 19,537,193 times
Reputation: 7767
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny View Post

woop, woop, woop….(nyuk, nyuk, nyuk…)
lol!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 12:04 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,794 posts, read 14,237,332 times
Reputation: 7950
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny View Post
What was the lie? Bush had his people saying Saddam was behind 9/11 on the SAME DAY it happened! There was absolutely no proof of this, but he still planted the seed and hoped it would grow. When that didn't work, he LIED about Saddam having WMD's, and millions of people knew he was lying. Many Democrats knew he was lying. Anyone who had heard of the Project For A New American Century knew he was lying. If you want quotes, names, and dates, there are copious examples from 2002 to 2003. Yellowcake in Niger? Mohammed Atta meeting with Iraqi officials in the Czech Republic? The examples are too numerous to list.

Amazingly, there are still true believers like yourself in this world. Talk about drinking the Kool Aide…...
Quote? Link? If the examples are "too numerous to list," what is stopping you from listing one or two? PNAC broke into your dwelling and holding a gun to your head?

Where is the evidence that "Bush had his people saying Saddam was behind 9/11." Give the quote and the evidence that it was directed by Bush.

On Sept 15-16, 2001, W Bush had meetings at Camp David w/ all the major FP players--Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, and others. At the end Bush spoke with JCS chair Hugh Shelton.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cobra II
The president asked Shelton to tell him if he was making a mistake by focusing on Al Qaeda instead of Saddam. Shelton reassured the president that he had made the correct call. Attacking Iraq...[would]hamper the coalition-building efforts. Nor, he added, was there any reason to think that Iraq was linked to the Sept 11 attacks.

"That's what I think," Bush told Shelton. "We will get this guy, but at a time and place of our choosing," Bush added, referring to Saddam.
(p. 19, Cobra II by NYT reporter M. Gordon and Gen. B. Trainor).

So in the same time frame you claim Bush was concocting conspiracies, he was arguing against going to Iraq (as was Colin Powell). Both Powell and Bush thought at the time that we should put off dealing w/ Iraq to a later time. Powell thought after the 2004 election would be the time to go to Iraq.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 12:14 PM
 
Location: Central Illinois -
21,409 posts, read 14,299,973 times
Reputation: 14531
Quote:
Originally Posted by wutitiz View Post
Quote? Link? If the examples are "too numerous to list," what is stopping you from listing one or two? PNAC broke into your dwelling and holding a gun to your head?

Where is the evidence that "Bush had his people saying Saddam was behind 9/11." Give the quote and the evidence that it was directed by Bush.

On Sept 15-16, 2001, W Bush had meetings at Camp David w/ all the major FP players--Cheney, Powell, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Libby, and others. At the end Bush spoke with JCS chair Hugh Shelton.

(p. 19, Cobra II by NYT reporter M. Gordon and Gen. B. Trainor).

So in the same time frame you claim Bush was concocting conspiracies, he was arguing against going to Iraq (as was Colin Powell). Both Powell and Bush thought at the time that we should put off dealing w/ Iraq to a later time. Powell thought after the 2004 election would be the time to go to Iraq.
I provided TWO examples already.

Bush was, of course, too stupid to know anything about Saddam Hussein. However, it was members of PNAC that were behind the plan to invade Iraq on Sept. 11, 2001 up until the invasion in 2003, and their spokespersons were leading the narrative on the same day that the Twin Towers were destroyed that Saddam was behind the attacks. During the 2003 invasion of Iraq, around 70% of those involved believed that Saddam was behind 9/11, such was the level of brainwashing prevalent in the military at the time.

It did not take long to get Bush on board, however, and he pursued the narrative with a messianic zeal. The "evidence" you are requesting can be taken from the source itself, George Walker Bush, the man responsible for the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq based on completely fabricated evidence of WMD's, evidence which, amazingly, you still believe.

It should not be surprising that it took Bush a month to get on board with the new narrative. If you will remember, there was virtual silence from the White House in the month after 9/11 as the schemers and plotters worked to craft their nefarious plan. Then, in late October, there was the symbolic parachute into Afghanistan by a Ranger regiment and some Airborne troops, and, of course, letting Bin Laden and top leadership escape from Tora Bora, as to have someone available to use as a symbol in the "War on Terror" while energies and resources were directed towards Iraq.

I cannot believe it is 2015 and people still think Saddam Hussein was in possession of WMD's, but you have proven me wrong in this respect.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 12:52 PM
 
Location: Old Bellevue, WA
18,794 posts, read 14,237,332 times
Reputation: 7950
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny View Post
I provided TWO examples already.

Bush was, of course, too stupid to know anything about Saddam Hussein. However, it was members of PNAC that were behind the plan to invade Iraq on Sept. 11, 2001 up until the invasion in 2003, and their spokespersons were leading the narrative on the same day that the Twin Towers were destroyed that Saddam was behind the attacks. During the 2003 invasion of Iraq, around 70% of those involved believed that Saddam was behind 9/11, such was the level of brainwashing prevalent in the military at the time.

It did not take long to get Bush on board, however, and he pursued the narrative with a messianic zeal. The "evidence" you are requesting can be taken from the source itself, George Walker Bush, the man responsible for the illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq based on completely fabricated evidence of WMD's, evidence which, amazingly, you still believe.

It should not be surprising that it took Bush a month to get on board with the new narrative. If you will remember, there was virtual silence from the White House in the month after 9/11 as the schemers and plotters worked to craft their nefarious plan. Then, in late October, there was the symbolic parachute into Afghanistan by a Ranger regiment and some Airborne troops, and, of course, letting Bin Laden and top leadership escape from Tora Bora, as to have someone available to use as a symbol in the "War on Terror" while energies and resources were directed towards Iraq.

I cannot believe it is 2015 and people still think Saddam Hussein was in possession of WMD's, but you have proven me wrong in this respect.
You haven't giving me anything. Again give me a credible source, link, and quote. Not regurgitated babblings from Daily Kos or other moonbat site. You stated in your previous post that Bush directed his people to link Iraq to 9/11 on the day it happened. Now you say that he was too stupid to know anything about Iraq. Which is it?

As for your final sentence, where did I say I still believe in 2015 that Saddam had WMD in 2003? I don't believe it, and never said that I did. You must have hallucinated that one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-15-2015, 12:55 PM
 
36,617 posts, read 16,012,418 times
Reputation: 8309
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loveshiscountry View Post
Don't you think it's strange that even though they never saw them they still commented? And so what if he ended up actually having WMD? Many countries do.


On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam’s inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.

Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction - Salon.com

"The information we had in the intelligence committee was not the same information being given to the American people. I couldn't believe it," Majority Whip Richard J. Durbin, Illinois Democrat, said Wednesday when talking on the Senate floor about the run-up to the Iraq war in 2002.
"I was angry about it. [But] frankly, I couldn't do much about it because, in the intelligence committee, we are sworn to secrecy. We can't walk outside the door and say the statement made yesterday by the White House is in direct contradiction to classified information that is being given to this Congress."


Durbin kept silent on prewar knowledge*-*Nation/Politics*-*The Washington Times, America's Newspaper
From your same article:

"The e-mail said Mr. Durbin's comments were inconsistent with the words of other Democrats on the committee, including Sens. John D. Rockefeller IV of West Virginia and Carl Levin of Michigan. Those two Democrats said publicly before the war that Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein was intent on pursuing nuclear weapon"

Why did you omit this part?

Let's see what other dems had to say in Oct, 2002 and later.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
- Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force -- if necessary -- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years ... We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members ... It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
- Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction."
- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003


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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:18 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - 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 - Top