Cheney, "Obama is taking America Down!" (arsenal, Reagan, soldiers)

[burdell]

Originally Posted by T-310

The other peoples money Obama loves to spend will eventually run out.

So, when Bush/Cheney took us to war they were spending their own money?

[jeffbase40]

Originally Posted by Iamme73

You are confused about where that money comes from. It's their money.

Plus, the sanctions are going to end. Do you not get that? President Obama was only able to get these sanctions based on an agreement with the actual trading partners to Iran by saying these sanctions will force Iran to deal on nuclear weapons. It worked, but this means these nations didn't sign on to sanctions against Iran forever.

Once those other nations figure out we aren't going to get a nuclear treaty, they'll end their sanctions and Iran is making much more money anyway. And they still have all of their nuclear stockpile, all of their centrifuges, no inspections, and they'll continue working on a nuclear weapon. So your point is irrelevant.

Why would they end their sanctions? I don't think any of those nations want to see Iran get a nuke either.

[jeffbase40]

Originally Posted by ChrisFromChicago

you can't go any lower, technically, than where Cheney has left us. Cheney thinks Obama has taken us down, because he know realizes how far in the hole his administration put him.


The Bush administration, through gross incompoetence allowed 9/11 to happen (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/op...ings.html?_r=0). They condoned and supported the use of torture. They created the patriot act with congress support.

Oh and I'm sure we can expect fair and unpartial reporting from a highly liberal source like NYTimes huh?
You make it sound like Bush just purposely wanted 9/11 to happen as if he had specific intelligence about the date/time, method of attack and location. With just info that an attack was pending within months, what did you expect him to do? Shut down the entire country and wait it out?

Originally Posted by ChrisFromChicago

I can't think of anything that comes close to the destruction on america and the freedoms we used to value in any recent administration. . .

and I voted for Bush round 1. what an idiot I was.

I can. Obama has significantly made the US and the world a more dangerous place. Destroyed relationships with good alllies like Israel and pretty much started the Cold War again. Horrible polices like Obamacare that was rushed through Congress in a shady fashion and caused many Americans more financial heart ache.

[cremebrulee]

ChrisFromChicago you can't go any lower, technically, than where Cheney has left us. Cheney thinks Obama has taken us down, because he know realizes how far in the hole his administration put him.

I agree with you there.....

The Bush administration, through gross incompoetence allowed 9/11 to happen (http://www.nytimes.com/2012/09/11/op...ings.html?_r=0). They condoned and supported the use of torture. They created the patriot act with congress support.

and this to is so true

I can't think of anything that comes close to the destruction on america and the freedoms we used to value in any recent administration. . .

and I voted for Bush round 1. what an idiot I was.

You refuse to see, that once Obama took charge, things have gone downhill even farther...why? B/c you voted for him and it is hard to admit that he is wrong.

I voted for Bush in his first Term, and the same with Obama, neither one of them did any good for this country...and we're in more debt now then ever before....

In 8 years, no doubt, we will be getting the same post about Hilary.

Hillary will be worse then Bush and Obama put together, b/c she is power hungry....as soon as her husband got into office, they told her she had to quiet down, b/c she kept thinking she was running everything....and she finally did shut up, but her being president will be awful....
Plus I don't want another lifer poliltician in there, they are all dirty and the White house must be cleaned out....

In 8 years, no doubt, everything will be just as it is.. . .maybe a little better maybe a little worse on some things.

it keeps on getting worse and worse, but you refuse to see it....how long do you think America can take care of other countries, we are floundering financially, but they don't want any of us to see it....
We don't make anything substantial any longer, and if you think our roads and bridges are in bad shape, please consider the nuke and chemical plants....

[Ponderosa]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Why would they end their sanctions? I don't think any of those nations want to see Iran get a nuke either.

The rest of the world does not see Iran as the same threat that Americans have been misled to believe it is. 40 years of "boogeyman" policy with Iran to promote arms sales and interventions and pander to Jewish donors have Americans deep in distrust and not capable of making reasoned decisions. Obama is calling an end to the nonsense and the Republicans are going to continue to try to milk it for political ends as they have done for over a generation now. Democrats, too, are not above fear-mongering to raise funds. But I think at least 34 of them will have the good sense to recognize that we have been lead down the wrong path with respect to Iran and it is time to change directions.

[Wanderer0101]

Originally Posted by Iamme73

These are the actual choices before the nation.

Take the deal that was brought about by the sanctions President Obama put in place(which every conservative said would accomplish nothing) with the actual trading partners with Iran.

Get a deal that takes away 98% of their nuclear stockpile, 66% of their centrifuges, inspections, and gives us control to stop their nuclear weapons program for 15yrs.

And spend the next decade trying to enforce this deal.

Versus, squandering this deal, the sanctions get lifted anyway because those nations that actually do trade with Iran didn't agree to sanctions against Iran in perpetuity, which means Iran keeps all of its nuclear stockpile, all of their centrifuges, no inspections, and Iran continues trying to build a nuclear weapon with us having no control like we do right now. We'd just continue verbally threatening Iran, and pretending Israel will bomb Iran all the while Iran continues to build a nuclear weapon.

These are the factual choices on the table for our nation.

conservative opposition to this deal given the facts and their irrational rhetoric makes no sense.

Always interesting to see a 100% Kool-Aid drinker.

[burdell]

Originally Posted by jeffbase40

Oh and I'm sure we can expect fair and unpartial reporting from a highly liberal source like NYTimes huh?
You make it sound like Bush just purposely wanted 9/11 to happen as if he had specific intelligence about the date/time, method of attack and location. With just info that an attack was pending within months, what did you expect him to do? Shut down the entire country and wait it out?

NOT wasting resources planning a war against Iraq, which was being done long before 9/11, would've been a good start.

[silverkris]

Originally Posted by cremebrulee

Cheney: President Obama Wants 'To Take America Down' [VIDEO] | The Daily Caller

I totally Agree with Cheney, while I'm not fond of the man, he is correct....

This is a very bad mistake and now other middle eastern states will expect to gain nuclear weapons....
Obama and Kerry are idiots, there are no other words.

Cheney? That's really rich coming from him. Give me a break.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by burdell

So, when Bush/Cheney took us to war they were spending their own money?

Didn't Congress vote to go to war?

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998

CNN


"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998

CNN


"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998

Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall meeting in Columbus, Ohio


"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb 18, 1998

Transcript of remarks made at a Town Hall Meeting in Columbus, Ohio




"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the US Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin (D-MI), Tom Daschle (D-SD), John Kerry (D-MA), and others Oct. 9, 1998

Letter to Clinton by Levin, Daschle, Kerry and others


"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998

Statement by Rep. Nancy Pelosi - House of Representatives


"Hussein has chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999

Chicago Council of Foreign Affairs


"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001

Letter to President George W. Bush signed by 9 Congressmen, including Democrats Harold Ford, Jr., Joseph Lieberman, and Benjamin Gilman.


"We should be hell bent on getting those weapons of mass destruction, hell bent on having a credible approach to them, but we should try to do it in a way which keeps the world together and that achieves our goal which is removing the... defanging Saddam.." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Dec. 9, 2002

Jim Lehrer - PBS


"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

Transcript of Gore's speech




"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002

Transcript of Gore's speech


"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

U.S. Senate — Ted Kennedy


"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

Congressional Record




"When I vote to give the President of the United States the authority to use force, if necessary, to disarm Saddam Hussein, it is because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a threat, and a grave threat, to our security and that of our allies in the Persian Gulf region. I will vote yes because I believe it is the best way to hold Saddam Hussein accountable." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9,2002

Congressional Record




"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

Congressional Record


"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002

Congressional Record




"In 1998, the United States also changed its underlying policy toward Iraq from containment to regime change and began to examine options to effect such a change, including support for Iraqi opposition leaders within the country and abroad. In the 4 years since the inspectors, 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-Qaida members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.

It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capability to wage biological and chemical warfare and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East which, as we know all too well, affects American security." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

Congressional Record - Sen. Hillary Clinton




"The Joint Chiefs should provide Congress with casualty estimates for a war in Iraq as they have done in advance of every past conflict. These estimates should consider Saddam's possible use of chemical or biological weapons against our troops.

Unlike the gulf war, many experts believe Saddam would resort to chemical and biological weapons against our troops in a desperate -attempt to save his regime if he believes he and his regime are ultimately threatened." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D-MA) Oct. 8, 2002

Congressional Record




"There is one thing we agree upon, and that is that Saddam Hussein is an evil man. He is a tyrant. He has used chemical and biological weapons on his own people. He has disregarded United Nations resolutions calling for inspections of his capabilities and research and development programs. His forces regularly fire on American and British jet pilots enforcing the no-fly zones in the north and south of his country. And he has the potential to develop and deploy nuclear weapons... - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

Congressional Record

"But inspectors have had a hard time getting truthful information from the Iraqis they interview. Saddam Hussein terrorizes his people, including his weapons scientists, so effectively that they are afraid to be interviewed in private, let alone outside the country. They know that even the appearance of cooperation could be a death sentence for themselves or their families.

To overcome this obstacle, and to discover and dismantle Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction, UNMOVIC and the IAEA must interview relevant persons securely and with their families protected, even if they protest publicly against this treatment. Hans Blix may dislike running ''a defection agency,' but that could be the only way to obtain truthful information about Saddam's weapons of mass destruction - Sen. Joseph Biden

Congressional Record

"With respect to Saddam Hussein and the threat he presents, we must ask ourselves a simple question: Why? Why is Saddam Hussein pursuing weapons that most nations have agreed to limit or give up? Why is Saddam Hussein guilty of breaking his own cease-fire agreement with the international community? Why is Saddam Hussein attempting to develop nuclear weapons when most nations don't even try, and responsible nations that have them attempt to limit their potential for disaster? Why did Saddam Hussein threaten and provoke? Why does he develop missiles that exceed allowable limits? Why did Saddam Hussein lie and deceive the inspection teams previously? Why did Saddam Hussein not account for all of the weapons of mass destruction which UNSCOM identified? Why is he seeking to develop unmanned airborne vehicles for delivery of biological agents?" - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), October 9, 2002

Congressional Record




"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.

Iraq has continued to seek nuclear weapons and develop its arsenal in defiance of the collective will of the international community, as expressed through the United Nations Security Council. It is violating the terms of the 1991 cease-fire that ended the Gulf war and as many as 16 Security Council resolutions, including 11 resolutions concerning Iraq's efforts to develop weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. John Edwards, October 10, 2002

Congressional Record

[westboundrambler]

No, Obama, Bush, Clinton, Bush SR, they're all the same.