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.
nice try, but you have failed to remember that conservatives are trying to block bringing refugee muslims here.
as for the liberals wanting to bring them here, most that do think that somehow if they show some kind of compassion to these people that somehow the radicals will stop hating america, and we can all have a cumbya moment.
Conservatives are the ones that tried to fundamentally change the Middle East.
Remember how proud you all were about those "purple fingers" in Iraq?
Of course you do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haakon
What you know wouldn't fill a thimble. Just because radical Islam hates everything US liberal doesn't mean they love conservatives.
Conservatives are the ones that tried to fundamentally change the Middle East.
How so?
Pay attention, your buddies were all talk and no action for years.
Then when they didn't own the WH, they still voted for it...and when election time rolled up they pretended otherwise. Liberals speak out of both their mouth and their ass at the same time - to get votes. They'll hop on any social trend that will get them elected/power. Wishy-washy-power-hungry morons.
Quote:
Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade and much of his nation's wealth not on providing for the Iraqi people but on developing nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them."
-- President Bill Clinton (State of the Union Address), Jan. 27, 1998
"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 Bill Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"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 Bill Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"No one has done what Saddam Hussein has done, or is thinking of doing. He is producing weapons of mass destruction, and he is qualitatively and quantitatively different from other dictators.""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
"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
"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. 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:
-- Democratic Senators Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others, Oct. 9, 1998
"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
"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
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated 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, Dec 5, 2001
"I mean, we have three different countries that, while they all present serious problems for the United States -- they're dictatorships, they're involved in the development and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction -- you know, the most imminent, clear and present threat to our country is not the same from those three countries. I think Iraq is the most serious and imminent threat to our country."
-- Sen. John Edwards (D, NC) Feb. 24, 2002
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and th! e means of delivering them."
-- Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"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. We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." "
-- Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed. We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction."
-- Sen. Edward Kennedy (D, MA) Sep. 27, 2002
"Now let me be clear -- I suffer no illusions about Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal man. A ruthless man. A man who butchers his own people to secure his own power. He has repeatedly defied UN resolutions, thwarted UN inspection teams, developed chemical and biological weapons, and coveted nuclear capacity. He's a bad guy. The world, and the Iraqi people, would be better off without him."
-- State Senator Barack Obama (Democrat, Illinois) Oct. 2, 2002
"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
"My position is very clear: The time has come for decisive action to eliminate the threat posed by Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction."
-- Senator John Edwards (D, NC), Oct. 7, 2002
"We stopped the fighting [in 1991] on an agreement that Iraq would take steps to assure the world that it would not engage in further aggression and that it would destroy its weapons of mass destruction. It has refused to take those steps. That refusal constitutes a breach of the armistice which renders it void and justifies resumption of the armed conflict."
-- Sen. Harry Reid (D. NV) Oct. 9, 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
"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
"I come to this debate, Mr. Speaker, as one at the end of 10 years in office on the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, where stopping the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction was one of my top priorities. I applaud the President on focusing on this issue and on taking the lead to disarm Saddam Hussein. ... Others have talked about this threat that is posed by Saddam Hussein. Yes, he has chemical weapons, he has biological weapons, he is trying to get nuclear weapons."
-- Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D. CA) 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
"People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."
-- Ex President Bill Clinton, Jul. 22, 2003 (Interview with CNN Larry King)
I asked very direct questions of the top people in the CIA and people who'd served in the Clinton administration. And they said they believed that Saddam Hussein either had weapons or had the components of weapons or the ability to quickly make weapons of mass destruction. What we're worried about is an A-bomb in a Ryder truck in New York, in Washington and St. Louis. It cannot happen. We have to prevent it from happening.
-- Rep. Richard Gephardt (D, MT) Nov. 2, 2003
Pay attention, your buddies were all talk and no action for years.
Then when they didn't own the WH, they still voted for it...and when election time rolled up they pretended otherwise. Liberals speak out of both their mouth and their ass at the same time - to get votes. They'll hop on any social trend that will get them elected/power. Wishy-washy-power-hungry morons.
All talk is good. Your side took action and FAILED MISERABLY.
Conservatives are the ones that tried to fundamentally change the Middle East.
Remember how proud you all were about those "purple fingers" in Iraq?
Of course you do.
Yes it does. That's exactly what it means.
what conservatives? you talking about bush? he was no conservative. and beyond that your side of the isle SUPPORTED the use of force in iraq and afghanistan. once again you have shown yourself to be a failure on this.
Many liberals support bringing muslim refugees to the states, yet muslims fundamentally hate what liberals stand for. I'm not being facetious here; can someone help me understand, or point out where I err?
Because liberals understand the spirit of our nation's principles - leadership, justice, fairness, freedom, compassion, and equality.
Liberals understand that US is a melting pot and unless you're native Americans, you are an immigrant. In order to lead, you must show people you are willing to stand up for your own principles.
Leadership - US would not be showing leadership if we shut them out while the rest of the World is doing the heaving lifting.
Principles - US would also be showing the world that we do not take our own principles seriously.
Justice - To turn our backs on people who were on the receiving end of crimes, brutality, and being chased away from their homes is to show that we don't take the idea of justice and fairness seriously.
Freedom - We cannot preach freedom while not giving any to those most in need and are actively seeking it.
Compassion - We have no standing in castigating other countries' brutality if we don't ourselves show compassion to war-torn victims.
In other words, liberals know that in order to talk the talk, we have to walk the walk. Also, liberals have a higher understanding of our principles and what we need to do to maintain our place as the #1 nation in the world.
Pay attention, your buddies were all talk and no action for years.
Then when they didn't own the WH, they still voted for it...and when election time rolled up they pretended otherwise. Liberals speak out of both their mouth and their ass at the same time - to get votes. They'll hop on any social trend that will get them elected/power. Wishy-washy-power-hungry morons.
You posted a long list of quotes that show the liberals understood Iraq was a bad regime that should not be destabilized.
That actually made them seem smart and practical.
Unlike the conservatives, who shoot first and ask questions later. Look what they got us into.
.
what conservatives? you talking about bush? he was no conservative. and beyond that your side of the isle SUPPORTED the use of force in iraq and afghanistan. once again you have shown yourself to be a failure on this.
George W Bush was a conservative. Sorry.
You don't get to change his affiliation just because he led your party into the abyss. Back then, you guys were ready to physically confront people who criticized him. (Even though being conservatives, you were gonna lose)
Many liberals support bringing muslim refugees to the states, yet muslims fundamentally hate what liberals stand for. I'm not being facetious here; can someone help me understand, or point out where I err?
What will they vote for?
Contradiction erased.
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.
