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.
Previously you used the phrase " lying to start a war " and now it's "pushed us into war." There's a big difference. Remember the original question (which you never answered) was about corruption, and you cited "lying to start a war" as an example. I believe Wilson wrongly pushed us into WWI, but that doesn't make it an example of corruption.
Which is it: " lying to start a war " or "pushed us into war."
Don't care.
Fact is Republicans started the war. It was an unmitigated disaster - just like LOTS of Democrats predicted. The Republicans shouted them down calling then unpatriotic.
And since then, Republicans have by and large displayed an insatiable appetite for ever more pointless wars. I won't support that- and I would vote for any remotely viable candidate who I thought would be less destructive.
Spineless mediocrity is about the best you can hope for from Democrats these days. But that beats the hell outta wholesale death and active destruction that you can expect from Republicans.
It's funny how y'all right wingers try so hard to spread blame around for the Iraq war. It was an unmitigated disaster, just like Obama said it would be. Y'all shouted down anybody who objected, calling them unpatriotic. And now you won't take credit for your own war.
Not that I'd expect anything different from y'all.
For it before you were against it..... I would not expect any different.
I'm a Ron Paul wacko bird nut, so you know where I stand.
Had there been more Tea Party types, the vote may have gone the way the red-line in the sand vote on Syria did.
"Don't care" as far as I can tell is turkey speak for "can't answer." You post stuff, get challenged, can't back it up except to respond "don't care."
I guess all those complicated details are enough to give a turkey-head a turkey headache.
LOL.
You've seized upon a specific point that has been beat to death AND isn't particularly important to me. Whether Bush lied outright or was simply stupid doesn't matter all that much to me. Fact is he killed HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE. He set up our current surveillance-state that Republicans now pretend to oppose. And ANY opposition to this was labeled 'unpatriotic' by Republicans.
Look you don't have to support Hillary. Feel free to vote for another Bush if you like. Just know that you're voting for war. Motivated by politics and maybe profit.
Hold on- are you suggesting that 'Tea Party types' did not support, have not supported, and/or would not support the Iraq war?
Seriously?
Cause if that's what you're saying- and I think you are- then you do not inhabit reality.
Ron Paul was the only Tea Party member in Congress(the Godfather of the Tea Party) when the vote to go into Iraq was taken.
We must realize the Tea Party is the original Ron Paul groupies. His grassroots popularity, brought in the copycats, that were false prophets after the 2008 elections and the massive popularity and following, Ron Paul brought to the table.
I'm Tea Party too, was trending.
Ron Paul was the only Tea Party member in Congress(the Godfather of the Tea Party) when the vote to go into Iraq was taken.
We must realize the Tea Party is the original Ron Paul groupies. His grassroots popularity, brought in the copycats, that were false prophets after the 2008 elections and the massive popularity and following, Ron Paul brought to the table.
I'm Tea Party too, was trending.
First of all, the Tea Party didn't even exist til after Obama was elected. It began as a Koch-funded Astroturf campaign planned WELL in advance (Tea Party web domains were set up MONTHS before Santelli's rehearsed speech).
Secondly, Tea Party politicians on a national level- with the exception of Randy Paul- have been universally pro-war.
I sincerely hope this is a paid gig for you. Cause if you actually believe this stuff... I fear for your well-being.
You've seized upon a specific point that has been beat to death AND isn't particularly important to me. Whether Bush lied outright or was simply stupid doesn't matter all that much to me. Fact is he killed HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE. He set up our current surveillance-state that Republicans now pretend to oppose. And ANY opposition to this was labeled 'unpatriotic' by Republicans.
Look you don't have to support Hillary. Feel free to vote for another Bush if you like. Just know that you're voting for war. Motivated by politics and maybe profit.
I must say I'm impressed by this deflection of a deflection of a deflection. Remember, the original question was of D vs. R corruption. We moved on to lies about WMD (which is now "isn't particularly important" to you). And now on to the surveillance-state.
Here I was thinking you might be one those lefties whose brain is fried from drugs, and then you pull this off! BTW you do realize that Hillary supported the war in Iraq?
I'd say that lying to start a war that killed and wounded HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE make all accusations against Hillary look petty by comparison.
Too bad Bush believed Clinton and the UN. He should have known better, given what liars Democrats/liberals are known to be:
"I have mentioned the issue of anthrax to the Council on previous occasions and I come back to it as it is an important one.
Iraq has declared that it produced about 8,500 litres of this biological warfare agent, which it states it unilaterally destroyed in the summer of 1991. Iraq has provided little evidence for this production and no convincing evidence for its destruction.
There are strong indications that Iraq produced more anthrax than it declared, and that at least some of this was retained after the declared destruction date. It might still exist. Either it should be found and be destroyed under UNMOVIC supervision or else convincing evidence should be produced to show that it was, indeed, destroyed in 1991."
Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003
Quote:
"The nerve agent VX is one of the most toxic ever developed.
13,000 chemical bombs were dropped by the Iraqi Air Force between 1983 and 1988, while Iraq has declared that 19,500 bombs were consumed during this period. Thus, there is a discrepancy of 6,500 bombs. The amount of chemical agent in these bombs would be in the order of about 1,000 tonnes."
Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003
Quote:
"Also associated with these missiles and related developments is the import, which has been taking place during the last few years, of a number of items despite the sanctions, including as late as December 2002. Foremost amongst these is the import of 380 rocket engines which may be used for the Al Samoud 2 [missiles that deliver biological and chemical weapons]."
Dr. Hans Blix, Chief UN Weapons Inspector
Addressing the UN Security Council
January 27, 2003
What makes you think that Conservatives are in a position to judge others, when the people of that party had the atrocious judgment and instincts to believe George Bush would make a fine president?
Pubs tried to create yet another scandal, this one involving Hillary Clinton emails, and have FAILED yet again. Hillary is easy to defend because Republican wage baseless complaints and are always wrong.
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.
Meaningless example
