Undeniable proof that Bush has lied about the war on terror and Iraq.

Originally posted by AlwaysLearning

Originally posted by Jaruseleh

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't Kerry et al just supporting their president when told of "gathering threats" and that Saddam had WMD?

Thats right. They were supporting what THEY WERE TOLD BY THIS GOVERNMENT WAS GOING ON. Its amazing how the denial continues...

mrsdudara

You had better get your family member to fess up then. Because the report has been issued and it states that WMD was NOT found in any form. The ONLY thing found pertaining to WMD has been documents. Period.



[edit on 1/28/05 by Kidfinger]

The bottom line:

If you ask the family of a US soldier who has died in Iraq, WHAT DID YOUR CHILD DIE FOR?

If you ask the family of an Iraqi civilian, accidentally killed in "collateral damage", WHAT DID YOUR CHILD DIE FOR?


What's the answer?


(The worst part of it is you can ask an Iraqi civilian : "What would you rather, live under Saddam Hussein with your child, or live in a free country with your child dead and buried?" What do you think the answer would be?)

Ask yourself the same question.


j

Right now I believe that the family of death soldiers are questioning the motives of this war and why their loves ones are really dying for.

Also, is many "survivors" soldiers that had to live for the rest of their lives with the results of this war of lies, they are handicap and now the government is been slam for no taking care of them.

Originally posted by marg6043


Also, is many "survivors" soldiers that had to live for the rest of their lives with the results of this war of lies, they are handicap and now the government is been slam for no taking care of them.

And this brings to light another lie as told by our administration. When our soldiers are recruited, they are told they will recieve the best medical treatment that money can buy. This is true, untill they get out. Then the VA takes over and is a pathetic excuse for the medical care recieved while being on active duty.

Saddam had plenty of chances to disam. The useless UN let this guy defy resolution after resolution letting Saddam play cat and mouse for years! It took the US enforcing UN res 1441 for it to really mean anything. You can complain all you want about not having a WMD smoking gun but bottom line is/was Saddam a ruthless leader. He would have definitely aquired a nuke eventually. The world is a better place without a radical like Saddam in power.

aarostr:

It took the US enforcing UN res 1441 for it to really mean anything. You can complain all you want about not having a WMD smoking gun but bottom line is/was Saddam a ruthless leader. He would have definitely aquired a nuke eventually. The world is a better place without a radical like Saddam in power.

He would have acquired a nuke eventually? Do you know this for sure? Is the possession of one nuclear weapon by a dictator enough to invade a sovereign country?

What about Pervez Musharaff in Pakistan? Military dictator with nuclear arms.

Please explain.


j

Originally posted by Kidfinger
I wrote this as a comparison of Bushes statments about Iraq and the war on terror for those who constantly say Bush has held steadfast in his reasonong. It should be clear that Bush is the TRUE flip floper. The KING of flip flops.

Really, Kidfinger.
Another Selecto-Vision 101 candidate.

Since we haven't found WMD in Iraq, a lot of the anti-war/anti-Bush crowd is saying that the Bush administration lied about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction. Well, if they're going to claim that the Bush administration lied, then there sure are a lot of other people, including quite a few prominent Democrats, who have told the same "lies" since the inspectors pulled out of Iraq in 1998. Here are just a few examples that prove that the Bush administration didn't lie about weapons of mass destruction...

"[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." -- From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

"This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, 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 refine 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." -- From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

"Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities" -- From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

"Saddam's goal ... is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq's weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed." -- Madeline Albright, 1998

"(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983" -- National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

"Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement." -- Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

If The Bush Administration Lied About WMD, So Did These People -- Version 3.0

Need anymore? Let me know.



seekerof

Originally posted by aarostr442
Saddam had plenty of chances to disam. The useless UN let this guy defy resolution after resolution letting Saddam play cat and mouse for years! It took the US enforcing UN res 1441 for it to really mean anything. You can complain all you want about not having a WMD smoking gun but bottom line is/was Saddam a ruthless leader. He would have definitely aquired a nuke eventually. The world is a better place without a radical like Saddam in power.

I never said the world wasnt a better place without him. I was in the first gulf war. I know what this sick bastard is capable of. I brought up the fact that Bush has lied about this war AND the war on terror to justify his means of accomplishment. Bush lied. That is the topic. Not wether or not Saddam was an arse. We know that.

Seekerof,

This is about Bush. It is NOT about anybody else. It is about accountability which is not being honored. Bush lied, and I showed his own words to prove it. No matter what you post from whomever else, it wont change the fact that Bush lied and and continues to lie to us.

If Saddam would have just made a national announcement, which would have recieved 100% media coverage, saying that the UN was welcome to check ANY facility at ANY time, and that he had nothing to hide at all, none of us would be having this discussion today. It would have been that simple. He would still be in power today, no matter how much Bush wanted otherwise. Why did he make it so easy for Bush to decieve the world? That's what I can't understand. If the police search your home, can you tell them "you can look in the kitchen, but not the bedroom, oh yeah, and not the bathroom either, you can look in the living room, but give me about an hour before I will let you look there"? No, I don't think that would fly. And if you had nothing to hide, you certainly wouldn't try that. I don't understand what the hell Hussein was thinking.

Originally posted by 27jd
I don't understand what the hell Hussein was thinking.

OR,

If Bush would have come out and said he was attempting to rid the world of an evil man, spread democracy and establish peace in the middle east, he would not have lost anywhere near the support he has lost since the begenning of the war. He lost support because he misled most of the nation as to his true intentions. And we would not be having this conversation.

I guess they both just suck, huh? And they took us all for the sucky ride.

We passed 'sucky ride' about 8 months ago.

Originally posted by 27jd
You know the answer to that question. But gut feelings don't hold up in court.

Understood. I'm just saying, for yourself, what do you believe in your gut?

I always knew there was something wrong with that all-fired rush to invade Iraq, though I couldn't quite put my finger on it. No one in their right mind rushes to war unnecesarily unless there is an ulterior motive.

Originally posted by Kidfinger
We passed 'sucky ride' about 8 months ago.

The universe will see justice done against the both of them, I hope.

Originally posted by Kidfinger
Seekerof,

This is about Bush. It is NOT about anybody else. It is about accountability which is not being honored. Bush lied, and I showed his own words to prove it. No matter what you post from whomever else, it wont change the fact that Bush lied and and continues to lie to us.

Kidfinger, the problem on this issue, is that in the matter of Iraq's WMDs, there is no one person to blame, such as you are doing. Evidences and proofs gathered on Saddam's WMDs has been an ongoing process since before the Clinton administration. I applaud your efforts to try and pin it all on the shoulders of one man: Bush, but I ain't buying into it. France, Germany, Israel, Egypt, the UK, Russia, Spain, and a host other nations asserted and said likewise, and they are not held accountable to the extent of being called "liars," as your doing with Bush? Strange....

The information has been provided from one angle, I simply provided it from all angles. There are a whole mass of "liars" on this issue of Saddam having WMDs.

The only thing that you can pin on Bush was that he actually used the controversial information as one pretext, of many, to go to war.
I also find it simply hilarious that even some Democrats are now going around and saying what those "neocons" have been saying and asserting all along: that Russia had a hand in moving and dispersing Saddam's WMDs, that Iran has some, and that Syria has some...... Irony, indeed. Yet, only Bush "lied." Seems to me that there are a whole lot of them covering their respective arses on this issue, and they are all not Republicans and "neocons"......





seekerof

[edit on 28-1-2005 by Seekerof]

To Kidfinger and others who have served out county I say thanks!
Anyhow Kidfinger you should not be surpried that our fine politicians have lied to us. its not the first time and it won't be the last either.

Originally posted by AlwaysLearning
Understood. I'm just saying, for yourself, what do you believe in your gut?

My gut tells be he's a greedy lying bastard, just like all politicians, but he's the worst.

I always knew there was something wrong with that all-fired rush to invade Iraq, though I couldn't quite put my finger on it. No one in their right mind rushes to war unnecesarily unless there is an ulterior motive.

Yeah, but don't you also wonder why Saddam didn't come out and stop Bush dead in his tracks like I mentioned in the post above? It would have been soooooo easy.

I will have to agree that is not the first time that administrations had lied to the people.

But it's something about this one and the morality is an issue in the lies, for somebody that claim himself a God follower at every turn like bush he sure has not guilt for the results of his mistakes.