Finally they admit that there are NO weapons! (http://archives.seattletimes.nwsource.com/cgi-bin/texis.cgi/web/vortex/display?c=1&slug=weapons29&date=20040129&query=weapons)
Took them long enough, so why did we attack Iraq again? Only reason I remember him giving was WMD. The real reason was because Bush was mad about the assassination attempt on his dad, that why. That or oil, but I'll give him the benefit of the doubt. If we actually cared about how the civilians were being treated, then why havn't we attacked Iran and North Korea yet? What about all those starving in Africa and India? We don't even need to kill anyone to help them. The reason is because there's no gain for helping them.

I am so glad this is right before elections too. Finally get that liar out of here. Get Dean or Kerry in there, either one'd be able to clean up this mess.

Yeah, I agree, WindWip. The liar needs to get out and stay out.

George bush are weapon o f mass destructon

LOL, with brainiacs like this on their side, how can the Dems lose?

"bush is a WMD!"

"its for his daddy!"

"bush is a liar!"

"no blood for oil!"

Yeah Travh, I hope there's enough brainiacs to get the brainless out. hehehe

Originally posted by Travh20
LOL, with brainiacs like this on their side, how can the Dems lose?

"bush is a WMD!"

"its for his daddy!"

"bush is a liar!"

"no blood for oil!"

Do you think Bush told the truth about the WMD's in Iraq? Or are you too busy laughing at everyone else to care that you've been misled?

and all those people with half a brain that voted for Al Gore too

Originally posted by Vilepagan
Do you think Bush told the truth about the WMD's in Iraq? Or are you too busy laughing at everyone else to care that you've been misled?


I dont think he lied, he said what he thought was true. I know its popular to think he lied to everyone, but I dont think it was intentional, and besides, there may be some WMD that turn up yet, we havent searched everywhere. And I dont feel like I was misled, because I was for ousting the bum anyway, WMD or no WMD< that wasnt the reson I really cared about, it was just time for the bum to go after so long of snubbing his nose at us and everyone else. It was time to make an example of someone, and he was the prime candidate.

but I dont think it was intentional,
So are you saying that Bush is an incompetent moron?!

and all those people with half a brain that voted for Al Gore too
"And the president laughed 'cause we voted for Nader" - NoFx

Travh, there must have been a lot of half-brains (as you say) that voted for Gore, because he won the Popular vote. Everybody that voted for him are 'not' half-brained because I voted for him. If I'm half-brained, then whoever voted for Bush must be zero-brained. Okay, now I get it.

Blob, Bush is not the only one who thought SH was a threat, so did the following people:

-----------------------------------------
"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 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 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 Sens. 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 the 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 seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. 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 alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (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. "[W]ithout 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 has 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.
-----------------------------------------------------------

now if you say they are all incompetent morons I will agree with you. Bush was going on the same intel as Clinton, only Bush decided to do something about it. Thats why i say the democrats hate him becasue he acts instead of BS'ing. Nowif you believe clintons latest lie, that he destroyed the last of the WMD wityh his lat air raid into iraq, go ahead, but in reality the only way to deal with SH was to go in, peacefully or by foce, it had to be done.

now if you say they are all incompetent morons I will agree with you.
It appears we are in agreement there.

Bush was going on the same intel as Clinton, only Bush decided to do something about it.
Apparently a lot of people had incorrect intel. But remember, Clinton did bomb Iraq.

but in reality the only way to deal with SH was to go in, peacefully or by foce, it had to be done.
Are you agreeing that there was a peaceful option?

I agree all politicians are idiots, yes.

No there was no peaceful way to deal the megolomaniac dictator who idolized stalin and hitler other than direct assault. WE could have done half assed non violent measures, like we had been doing, until he died of old age, but then his son would have taken over and so on and so on. Turning a blind eye to a problem may mean there is no direct violence to you, but it doesnt mean the problem goes away, and it doesnt mean there is "peace", remember, jsut becasue there is no war going on doesnt mean there is peace, that is the biggest mistake the peace activist make, they believe that becasue there is no war going on that there is peace throughout the world.

Gee guys, how long did Saddam have in the run up to the Gulf War II to hide/disperse his weapons of mass destruction? Nuclear bomb parts were found buried under a rose bush in some Iragi Scientists yard. Do you think that scientist was using those bomb parts for FERTILIZER?? Saddam DID gas people in his own country, are you going to stand by a sweeping statement that Saddam didn't have WMDs left after gassing the Kurds? Saddam had WMDs, the question is, where did they go?

The most frustrating thing about this war in Iraq, is that Clinton said the EXACT same thing about Saddam that Bush has said, but when Clinton said, you libs and France and Germany agreed with Clinton. Clinton used the policy of preemption to justify his little war in Kosovo, but when Bush used preemption to justify the invasion of Iraq/Afghanistan he's violating some sacred U.N. law.

So use of military force is justified only when a Democrat is running the country, is that what you're saying, Windwip?

Halliburton plain and simple.

Rain bombs down on Iraq, steal 200 billion (87 billion at a time) from the tax payers (social security funds), award the rebuilding contracts to Halliburton on a NO-BID basis and you have a classic example of raiding the treasury and the transfer of wealth to the top 1%.

Dop

Halliburton again, ya, OK Dop. This whole war was done for halliburton, your right. Its all about oil. Bush conspired with Bin laden to target America so we would have an excuse to go into the middle east and take over. Then, when we took over we would let halliburton take over the middle east from us, so that the top 1% could get rich. You've got it all figured out Dop, hell, why are you on this message board, why are you not testifying befoe a select senate comittee right now?

I see that windwip has chosen not to reply to my post. What a shame!