Free Trial Ad
Why Subscribe?
  • Player/Prospect News
  • Exclusive Insider Info
  • Members-Only Forums
  • Exclusive Videos
  • Subscribe Now!
InboxChat RoomChat Room (0 fans in chatroom)
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 8  Next >

So where are the apologies?

Posted: 6/20/2014 8:21 AM

So where are the apologies? 


Seems ISIS has found chemical weapons on the way to taking Bagdad. The U.S. Military left them there when the pullout started. So we found these WNDs but I don't remember seeing news articles reporting this. But now they are reporting them and no apologies from the Bush lied people died side.

So Bush and the intelligence reports were correct all along. Hmmmmmmmmm.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 8:58 AM

Re: So where are the apologies? 


eek


Thing is everyone agreed they had intelligence that had them.   Hillary and Horse Face Kerry were on board.  But the MSM was so intent on winning an election that they couldnt report the news. They had to make the news.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 9:09 AM

Re: So where are the apologies? 


we knew about them for years.. the majority of them are in syria.. it was reported elsewhere, just not here- where it was carefully and willfully neglected by the MSM, and not even played by the alternative news media, which i thought at the time (and still do) was dang strange.

i was in doha Qatar, at As Sayliyah, when the reports and later live feeds arrived at CENTCOM.. we sat in on that initial briefing, and then later briefings with members of the press sitting right behind us watching it as well.

it has infuriated me for a long time when encountering a sniveling democrat/liberal/Bush hater when they contend 'there were no WMD's' and snort it over and over- when I know damn well there were and are.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 9:21 AM

Re: So where are the apologies? 


Chemical WMD's were found in Iraq while Bush was still in office but that minor fact didn't fit the Democrat's narrative so it has been ignored by the MSM and libs posting on this board over the last 6-8 years.
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/20/2014 9:47 AM

Re: So where are the apologies? 


Fun.  So just to be clear you are now saying that because you think ISIS has found chemical weapons that we supposedly didn't know about earlier then the Iraq War was justified.  

Hmmmmmmm..  Can't wait for this answer..
kingsvol wrote: Seems ISIS has found chemical weapons on the way to taking Bagdad. The U.S. Military left them there when the pullout started. So we found these WNDs but I don't remember seeing news articles reporting this. But now they are reporting them and no apologies from the Bush lied people died side.

So Bush and the intelligence reports were correct all along. Hmmmmmmmmm.
~The Economist: "Once upon a time the American right led the world when it came to rethinking government; now it is an intellectual pygmy"~


Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 9:50 AM

What? 


What?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 10:13 AM

To Be More Accurate.... 


..the following people did know  about the WMD's and supported the Iraq 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 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

"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

"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

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

"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

"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

"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

"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




Last edited 6/20/2014 10:20 AM by roadvol

Reply | Quote
  • indyv
  • Head Coach
  • 15073 posts this site

Posted: 6/20/2014 10:21 AM

Re: So where are the apologies? 



drewactual wrote: we knew about them for years.. the majority of them are in syria.. it was reported elsewhere, just not here- where it was carefully and willfully neglected by the MSM, and not even played by the alternative news media, which i thought at the time (and still do) was dang strange.

i was in doha Qatar, at As Sayliyah, when the reports and later live feeds arrived at CENTCOM.. we sat in on that initial briefing, and then later briefings with members of the press sitting right behind us watching it as well.

it has infuriated me for a long time when encountering a sniveling democrat/liberal/Bush hater when they contend 'there were no WMD's' and snort it over and over- when I know damn well there were and are.
you should have pulled a whistle blower and took photos and posted them on the net.....you would have been famous......that is of course if they were really there.....

that being said,  I think anyone in their right mind thought sadam had the WMD's.....hell he gassed his own people....but that was still not reason for us to invade Iraq......

we have to get the complete hell out of the ME and stay out unless we are attacked again....and then 40 100 megatonners all over the entire area.....if that does not stop these crazy religious fools, another 40.......a nest of  religious fundamentalist is like a nest of cockroaches.....you have to kill them to get rid of them and then they will still show up somewhere else.....

in addition all American oil company executives and major stock holders need to be investigated for treason and crimes against humanity.....
Reply | Quote
  • indyv
  • Head Coach
  • 15073 posts this site

Posted: 6/20/2014 10:23 AM

Re: who cares 


let's just get the hell out......even Glenn Beck says so
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 10:37 AM

To be fair... 


Roady must be arguing that Bush was just bowing under pressure from the Democrats to invade Iraq, so the buck doesn't really stop with him.  

That would be in-keeping with his I'm-never-wrong approach to politics.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 10:37 AM

Re: So where are the apologies? 



indyv wrote:

we have to get the complete hell out of the ME and stay out unless we are attacked again....and then 40 100 megatonners all over the entire area.....if that does not stop these crazy religious fools, another 40.......a nest of  religious fundamentalist is like a nest of cockroaches.....you have to kill them to get rid of them and then they will still show up somewhere else.....


Indy, your post here, as most, are contrived from a position of absolute lack of any reasonable understanding... you speak more from a position on the outer fringe either left or right, both of which live in and seek chaos.... and both of which are ignorant.

you are supporting, and commenting insistently that you are advocating and willing to destroy a people- commit genocide, mind you- because your self righteousness has justified it.. what separates you from any tyrant?

you are a humorous and dangerous study on human nature, which is to ostracize and condemn opposition and attempt to bring the remainder to your way of thinking, and all when the factions you are attacking demonstrate the same characteristics you do, but simply support the 'other side'..

on another subject, how are your investments doing?  are you safe in your home with your vehicle in the driveway?  do you enjoy your ability to comment wildly on a message board with no fear of repercussions?  how are those old war injuries doing?  do they still bother you?

..................................................

Last edited 6/20/2014 10:50 AM by drewactual

Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 10:40 AM

Re: To be fair... 



fuzzynavol wrote: Roady must be arguing that Bush was just bowing under pressure from the Democrats to invade Iraq, so the buck doesn't really stop with him.  

That would be in-keeping with his I'm-never-wrong approach to politics.
do you, or do you believe your position of 'solely blaming bush for the invasion of Iraq' is accurate and inline with the left's rhetoric?  or, do you believe it is just 'inline with the left's rhetoric'?

serious question...
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 11:04 AM

Serious answer... 


"do you, or do you believe your position of 'solely blaming bush for the invasion of Iraq' is accurate and inline with the left's rhetoric?  or, do you believe it is just 'inline with the left's rhetoric'?"

Is it inline with the left's rhetoric or is it inline with the left's rhetoric?  noidea  Slow down there, fella - you ain't makin no sense.  

But I'll elaborate on my opinion and maybe answer what you were trying to ask.  The war was Bush's decision and his mistake.  Regrettably, I personally supported his decision to invade under the mistaken assumption that "they must know even more than they're telling us if they're willing to go over there and start a war."  Turns out they knew less than they thought they knew, and (as with most other issues) their various biases clouded their judgement disastrously.  

I think the majority of prominent Democrats didn't have the courage to consider an anti-war stand.  There could be no up-side.  If the war was a strategic success, they'd be positioned in the wrong, and if it turned out a mistake, they were supporting the president during war-time.  It was the safe position.  For denialist republicans to point to them now as if they're somehow also to blame is a sad testimony to their immaturity.  
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/20/2014 11:06 AM

Re: What? 


What part didn't you understand?
kingsvol wrote: What?
~The Economist: "Once upon a time the American right led the world when it came to rethinking government; now it is an intellectual pygmy"~


Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 11:07 AM

Re: So where are the apologies? 


before the left took ownership of the 'occupy' movement, which was nothing but a clever political move and attempt to demonstrate support for their agendas, those people were just mad, and had nothing to focus their anger on... and maybe they were trying to recapture or recreate the sixties... who knows... but, they were just a collection of people who were fed up with things they couldn't even point a finger to- they just knew something was and is wrong...

they aren't that much different than the PEOPLE of Iraq.  the people have been ran over for generations, and then we come in with out cowboy hats on tipsy all arrogant and cocky, and tell them "things 'bout to change, y'all"... and they did.. for the worse..

our military strategy was impressive.. we succeeded in grand fashion to destroy the Iraqi regime and remove them from power.. a matter of fact, it may have worked TOO well.. It was justified, it was needed, and it was smart for the security of the planet (and yes, libs, monetarily is included in that)... The predicament we found ourselves in was almost unprecedented, in that we created a vacuum of leadership in a country of 'occupy mentality' people who are ready to do 'something', even if 'something' is wrong... at least it was movement, to them..

despair (and true despair, not our version of it living our posh lifestyles) leads to abrupt and extreme mentality that leads straight to conflict, when the bar for what is accepted is dropped... it leads to stealing and killing and the lack of accurate information can lead to simple misunderstandings that turn into wars against not only sovereign government but also neighboring factions who you fear 'know' more than you, are somehow reaping benefits you don't have, or are advancing on filling the vacuum with leaders of their own and you don't know the game and agenda of those leaders, so you approach with 'hope for the best, prepare for the worst' mindset.. 

Bush (administration) failed in not realizing a plan to carry Iraq forward.. instead, they went straight to 'democracy' and in attempts to allow Iraq to define it's own leaders- which was like tossing gas on the fire, so to speak, of the suspicions and unrest the military actions created...

those people were and are abandoned by us for political gain, as the left trumpeted and exploited our own sub-human nature, or maybe better described as American nature to 'get it over with and move on', and we bailed on them when we had a responsibility to hold their hand until they were stable... that is on the democraps, not the repubs...
Reply | Quote
Avatar

Posted: 6/20/2014 11:08 AM

Re: Serious answer... 


Agree.. only missed the part of ginning up the "evidence"..


fuzzynavol wrote:

But I'll elaborate on my opinion and maybe answer what you were trying to ask.  The war was Bush's decision and his mistake.  Regrettably, I personally supported his decision to invade under the mistaken assumption that "they must know even more than they're telling us if they're willing to go over there and start a war."  Turns out they knew less than they thought they knew, and (as with most other issues) their various biases clouded their judgement disastrously.  

I think the majority of prominent Democrats didn't have the courage to consider an anti-war stand.  There could be no up-side.  If the war was a strategic success, they'd be positioned in the wrong, and if it turned out a mistake, they were supporting the president during war-time.  It was the safe position.  For denialist republicans to point to them now as if they're somehow also to blame is a sad testimony to their immaturity.  
~The Economist: "Once upon a time the American right led the world when it came to rethinking government; now it is an intellectual pygmy"~


Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 11:31 AM

Sometimes I Really Worry About You Fuzz 


How you come to some conclusions is a mystery.
But I doubt you really believe what you just posted.
At no time did I  say, imply or even hint that Bush was bowing under pressure to the Democrats.
My post only showed that at the time of the build up to the invasion of Iraq the Democrats were fully on board with the war and completely agreed with the threat of WMD's in Iraq.
Perhaps I need to attach pictures for you to understand posts in the future.
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 11:35 AM

If Anyone "Ginned' up The Evidence... 


..it was a complete bipartisan effort as proven by the quotes. Everyone in Congress had the same exact evidence that Bush had.
And if you question  that then how do you justify Bill Clinton's quotes while he was president?
Are you suggesting Bush "ginned" up evidence for Clinton?
Sometimes facts are a nuisance aren't they?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 11:43 AM

Re: So where are the apologies? 


you libs...

either you know and totally dismiss certain facts, or your ignorance is the bliss where you find your moral high ground..

we haven't been in a world war since the 40's, though some will argue that is what is happening now.. ever ask yourself why?

the Korean War, the War in Vietnam, the first Gulf War- Afghanistan, Iraq........ Grenada, Panama, Somalia, Peru (doubt you know anything about that).... our very own 'game of thrones' is what it amounts to, and it is REQUIRED so that you people can live your lives safe and secure- even buffered away to the point your forget about the things that need to happen to keep your bliss alive and well... 

news flash- we play global politics.. sometimes that game is won with good old fashioned 'scratching backs', sometimes it is 'the enemy of my enemy', sometimes it is extortion or blackmail, buying someone off, sometimes it is armed conflict that goes without notice and sometimes it is straight up overt war.  -- the game is defined by solidifying nations with similar general interests in terms of livelihood, and at the same time destabilizing potential threats to our interests, be that threat a state, a faction, a faction guised as a religion, or a crazy person with too many toys.... we're pretty dang good at this, as there hasn't been a force amassed against our way of life allowed to grow to become a serious threat since the forties. 

we have assets and we must remain loyal to their interests in order to keep them assets.. there are those who want to take what we've accomplished, or at least a part of it that matters to them, and in order to seize power.. the power i speak of is what has allowed us to live the lifestyles we live- to be able to devote time and energy in allowing silly STUPID and meaningless ideas and notions to press itself into our daily lives- examples: same sex marriage, gay rights, abortion, gun control, what the freakin' kardashians are doing... it also allows us the ability to devote money and time to develop cool things like the internet, direct tv, remote freakin' controls... without the geo-political game that is played out on the boundaries such as Korea, Vietnam, Grenada, Peru, Panama, Somalia, and in Africa and the ME especially, we don't have the luxuries most liberals put on top of the agenda and is responsible for securing their vote...

since the advent of free information real time, and since the political game (our own internal struggle as a nation) has busted through the barriers that keep us safe and is of interest to the entire nations lifestyle, and now uses those principles as political treasures and tools, we have suffered- AND- we are seeing alignment of forces on one side or the other that defy the 'control' of states/nations- and we're running head long into another massive collision akin to the Great War and the follow-up WWII, and all because the Geo-political game, which was once protected, has broken down and become part of partisan conflict for freakin' monetary gain of a few (politicians without scruples)....

the amazing thing is that this will fall on deaf ears for those who still don't want to acknowledge that having their gas tank filled, wearing their popular nikes whilst playing playstation in front of a korean tv and eating shrimp fried rice has any connection to the game we play- and condemn the game off highhandedly....

guess what? you living your lifestyle was paid for by us killing people who played for the wrong side- wrong side as defined by opposing our interests.  by the way, opposing our interests is a much more fluid thing than it used to be... wonder why?
Reply | Quote

Posted: 6/20/2014 12:03 PM

Re: So where are the apologies? 



kingsvol wrote: Seems ISIS has found chemical weapons on the way to taking Bagdad. The U.S. Military left them there when the pullout started. So we found these WNDs but I don't remember seeing news articles reporting this. But now they are reporting them and no apologies from the Bush lied people died side.

So Bush and the intelligence reports were correct all along. Hmmmmmmmmm.

Excellent point.  I'm becoming so disengaged, that I failed to connect the dots.

Just to keep things in perspective:

If you think 911, Iraq, Afghanistan -- the entire Mideast quandary, with which we have been tar-babied -- is primarily about geopolitics, oil, religion, or competing cultures:  then you are only looking at the surface.

There is a war that is ongoing, which completely subsumes and transcends its manifestations in the physical realm.

We -- every person who has ever lived -- are the prey, the pawn, and the prize in that war.

The United States' philosophical foundations have been steadily eroding for at least 50 years (though the erosion process actually began long before that), with steadily increasing intensity.  That led to structural cracks throughout the "building" that is our nation.  911 is the precision strike that exploited those fissures, removing all structural integrity; since then, the factionalized pieces of the country have been busily dismantling what's left.

A nation of independent-minded, God-fearing people of faith, leading the world by example, is not what is scheduled for the world's future.  

And the future is now.
Reply | Quote
Reply to TopicPost New Topic
  Page of 8  Next >