It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Where is the Left's apology to Bush?

page: 7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in


posted on May, 20 2004 @ 06:27 AM

We can get into a circular argument about who started the fight, but in the end the US is no more right than the terrorists, they are just more powerful so what they says is automatically (supoosedly) legitimate.

Arguing with someone who believes this is futile.

posted on May, 20 2004 @ 07:04 AM

Originally posted by curme

[What part did Hussein have in 9/11? Didn't Bush say Husssein had nothing to do with it?

Curme, if Bush said Hussein had nothing to do with it, I didn't hear it. Were he to have said that I am quite sure I would have had some problems with him being included in the war on terror.

Here are a couple things I do remember:

Sometime last year they found papers in the Iraqi intelligence building connecting Hussein to Al Quada. Something about an aide to Osama meeting with Hussein or his representatives for several days, and leaving after having built a good relationship. This, by the way, was sometime in 1998 that they got together.

A couple of foreign intelligence agencies clued us in on the fact that Hussein and Osama were linked, that Iraqi intelligence had met with one of the terrorists that was personally involved in the plane attacks. They met in a city in Europe, although I don't remember which.

As far as weapons, biological weapons samples were found at a scientist's house, equipment for making and testing biological/chemical weapons as well as research on an hemorrhagic (sp?) fever was also found, according to David Kay, and this was noted in his report.
There have been more things than this come out, but I can't remember everything, now can I? Still, this is more than enough.

posted on May, 20 2004 @ 07:13 AM
In the below link I present some of the information that links Saddam to terrorism and Al Qaeda.

I probably posted more information elsewhere in the forum, I will see if I can dig it up.

"FP: It is undeniable, therefore, that Saddam had WMDs, right?

Pacepa: In the early 1970s, the Kremlin established a “socialist division of labor” for persuading the governments of Iraq and Libya to join the terrorist war against the US. KGB chairman Yury Andropov (who would later become the leader of the Soviet Union), told me that either of those two countries could inflict more damage on the Americans than could the Red Brigades, the Baader-Meinhof group and all other terrorist organizations taken together. The governments of those Arab countries, Andropov explained, not only had inexhaustible financial resources (read: oil), but they also had huge intelligence services that were being run by “our razvedka advisers” and could extend their tentacles to every corner of the earth. There was one major danger, though: by raising terrorism to the state level we risked American reprisal. Washington would never dispatch its airplanes and rockets to exterminate the Baader-Meinhof, but it might well deploy them to destroy a terrorist state. We therefore were also tasked to provide those countries secretly with weapons of mass destruction, because Andropov concluded that the Yankees would never attack a country that could retaliate with such deadly weapons."

Excerpts taken from.

posted on May, 20 2004 @ 07:21 AM

Originally posted by specialasianX

There is no evidence that any terror groups have any WMD's and there is little to no chance they will take over the world.

The fact that Hussein's intel boys were meeting with Osama's boys is enough to make one suspect. The fact that the Soviets lost accountability of dozens of their special weapons makes it more likely that terrorists will obtain them, or have and are attempting to position the weapons. We also know that the enemy wants to hit us as hard as they can, causing the most terror possible.

No evidence was recognized as such before the planes started striking things a couple years ago. I don't think we need to wait for concrete evidence. This is war. They declared it.

posted on May, 22 2004 @ 08:40 PM
Me thinks you ae a bit premature in having found the WMD to justify the Bush War.

Plus you best check the current 'Talking Points'( if you're on the FAX list); The current Administration line is, "WMD was transported by Saddam into Syria and is now stored in secret locations in Syria and Lebanon."

These locations are so secret that t takes at least 2 Google searches to find the Web Sites describing the stash and maps for the locations..... plus all the RW 'news' organs have been running stories about Syria and WMD for the past few weeks priming the pump so to speak......

You have to take your hat of the George for the size of his "jewels".... Syria is the next country we invade; and it will be soon.

I have no idea if Syria does have the WMD or not. Or this is just another case of 'bad intelligence' but I am sure the next place American boys will be dying is in Syria and can take that one to the bank.

posted on May, 23 2004 @ 12:57 AM
Bad intelligence? We all know for a fact that Hussein had chemical/biological weapons (Why do you call them WMD's, because they are not.). We also know that he played cat and mouse games with inspectors for months, making a mockery of the inspection process. And we also know that Bush made no secret what his intentions were, giving the enemies plenty of time to relocate the special weapons.

The amazing thing is not the "RW organs", but the "LW denials".

posted on May, 23 2004 @ 03:23 AM

Even if your one man war is a search and destroy mission on the truth, your strategy and tactics are failing you rapidly and you are fighting a losing battle.

Mr McNulty gave you a positive lead. Why did you choose not to take it and explore it?

posted on May, 23 2004 @ 07:34 AM

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Bad intelligence? We all know for a fact that Hussein had chemical/biological weapons (Why do you call them WMD's, because they are not.). We also know that he played cat and mouse games with inspectors for months, making a mockery of the inspection process. And we also know that Bush made no secret what his intentions were, giving the enemies plenty of time to relocate the special weapons.

The amazing thing is not the "RW organs", but the "LW denials".

Hussein DID have WMD. I agree.

If chemical/bio weapons are not WMD, what are they?

Cat and mouse he did play. As far as the "mockery" UN, Blix teams identified and destroyed 95% of Iraq's WMD as per Iraqi records.

Yes Bush did make known his intentions. That has been reported in books by Suskin, Clarke, Dean and Woodward and I do not dispute the possibility of Saddam having secreted the "remaining" WMD in Iraq or Syria. I also hold open the possibility that the remaining 5% of WMD was an accounting error. My reference to poor intelligence is what Bush called it. He has formed a Commission of high ranking officials and other friends investigating how this “error” could have happened and tasked to find solutions to the “problem.”

WHAT I DO KNOW is.....Bush rushed us into an unnecessary war against a 3-4th rate isolated/contained power; that was not an immediate threat to the security of the USA; and there is no connection between Iraq and al Qaeda (Bush even said so recently); and with costs now at $200 BILLION and counting ($200 Billion is the equivalent to providing free health care for every man, woman and child in the USA). I know that the Moms & Dad's of 700+ and 10,000+ maimed American boys (with more to follow) now know the meaning of ‘sacrifice’ and weigh their ‘cost’ with the benefit to the USA.

Further, while the war was well planned every contingency for post-war Iraq has been somewhat less successful. But that’s all well known……

My post was a musing of another known and well reported Bush plan/goal.

The run-ups to all new Bush initiatives have always been first trumpeted by the conservative media (always from “unnamed sources” or “high government officials” followed by Bush/Cheney speeches citing these news reports as and implied fact.)

I was just noting the signs and wondering if Bush would try again to take the USA to war again.

posted on May, 24 2004 @ 10:47 AM
I think that so many hate Bush that they fail to see the flaw's in Kerry. Double standards (from both campaings) on every damn issue.

Although one shell certainly wouldn't justify going to war (how old was it anyways?) the dems could certainly give some cadence to Bush on this. SOME mind you, not much.

Overall the war has been bunk since day one. The reasons for going, the reasons for staying. The saddest thing is the loss of life in Iraq (over 700 US troop deaths so far).

It grows everyday. Hopefully we won't be there much longer, whether Bush or Kerry is elected.

Oh and...

posted on May, 25 2004 @ 09:53 AM
Now that Bush and Company have been proven right on WMD in Iraq why are we not hearing more apologies?


Yea, right !!!!! Rumsfelt was in Iraq just before that "bomb" was found.
How do we know it wasn't "planted" there by this administration after all, they HAVE been doing a lot of underhanded, socially un-exceptable things during Bush's watch !!! Example; the prisoner abuse in Iraq, Heads should roll at the TOP, not at the bottom and there is no way Bush is innocent of the acts inflected upon those prisoners, he knew from the "get-go" what was taking place, he indorsed it, but if there is a very slim chance that Bush didn't know, then WE as a nation have a BIGGER Problem on our hands with a Lunatic running our nation !!!!!!!!!!

Apologize for what ? The only thing I'm sorry about is having an lunatic as president of the USA.
You righties should be apologizing to the world for electing and stealing the votes that put that S>O>B> in office in the first place.

posted on May, 25 2004 @ 10:37 AM
I'm so sure that Rumsfeld would have to go there for them to plant a weapon. That's a stupid assumption. I guess you think he planted it himself. Figures, stupid partisan voters...either have their eyes slanted left or right.

Stop looking at life through a soda straw.

posted on May, 25 2004 @ 10:59 AM
I know that terrible things were happening to the Iraq people at the hands of SH , I know a person that excaped from SH's prison and came here to the USA, but, that doesn't give GW Bush the right to start a war with SH and Iraq, SH wasn't bothering us . SH did threaten Bush, SR., and THAT is the real reason Bush JR wanted SH,.... revenge !!! Plus GW Bush had to fullfill his promise's to the BIG oil companies that helped finance him in his race for the white house in 2000 , and THEY are getting what was promised to them, but at what price,.... the deaths of hundreds of our troops, and Iraqie citizens ? Was it all worth it? HELL NO !!!!!!

One other thing your post with the Annex One list , some of the things on that list are being done to the prisoners in that prison in Iraq, and it has been going on for quite some time and BUSH knew about it and gave the go ahead , because if he hadn't known, he would be guilty of skirting his delegated duties which HE took an oath to uphold, to the people of the USA. In other words, knowing whats going on at all times under his watch.

I have no doubt in my mind that Bush is a "freak" for terror and tortures and gets off on the pictures.

posted on May, 25 2004 @ 11:16 AM

Originally posted by Variable
Now that Bush and Company have been proven right on WMD in Iraq why are we not hearing more apologies? The whole drum beat of the left has been "The war was a lie! There were no WMD!" Now that you lefties are wiping the egg off your faces can you see the truth yet? Do you still believe that there is no WMD? Is thy head still stuck in the sand?

A massive chunk of your argument is now gone **poof**

Come now Colonel, where is the "mea culpa, mea culpa?"


You've got to be kidding me. I truly hate it for you if you think we've discovered those weapons of mass destruction - the liar Chalabi - swore was there.

Are you referring to the couple of Iran-Iraq war-era shells (seeping decayed chemicals) they found, or were trying to plant? I hate to break it to ya, but that doesn't qualify.

Or are you thinking of the mobile labs Powell swore were buzzing around the Iraqi desert? He recently said his info. was bad and he was wrong.

Bush lied. His information was BAD. Alot of folks were fooled. It's called willfull ignorance - for the most part.

Should 'the left' apologize? It's neither left, nor right, our soldiers spilling blood and flesh in the Iraqi sands.

Apologize? HELL NO.

posted on May, 25 2004 @ 11:21 AM
overall their just as much the scourge of the earth as any other filthy rich, power hungry maniacs.

Thank you, you just described the Bush!

new topics

top topics

<< 4  5  6   >>

log in