Joe Contrarian said:
"politicizing national security"
"playing politics with the lives of Americans"
Anything that was featured in Bush-Cheney campaign ads, along with all other Republican and some Democratic talking points, can be considered catch phrases. And you are the master of them!
bblight said:
bblight, if you don't think the political classes, especially federal politicians, have become a ruling gentry of sorts, then you are wearing blinders. I would like to propose a resolution that anyone in America who has or is serving as a politician, as well as anyone who has previously run for public office, be permanently barred from from the government. Out with the old, in with the new. :drink:
Joe Contrarian said:So instead of cutsie catch phrases, Edub, how bout addressing the 17 UN resolutions, Edub? Or the plethora of Clinton speeches on WMD, Edub?
"Politicizing national security" is not a catch phrase. It's the truth. I call it, political opportunism. Is that better?
If I were a politician, it would make sense. But both of us are just bits of binary code floating in cyberspace. Clinton's BS is just as irrlevant to me as that of the GOP, I have stated many times that I would like to see all 77 senators who voted for the war be thrown out immediately. Anyway though, since when do conservatives care about enforcing UN resolutions? I'm sure there's a whole host of resolutions on the UN books that have never been enforced, so what are we doing about those?
edub69 said:
Because unlike most UN resolutions (there's a couple against Canada, even, having completely gone ignored) Iraq’s very own sovereignty had many qualifiers, contingent on Saddam's regime not breaking the 1991 Gulf War ceasefire, which he did on almost every front. Quite simply, Saddam was left power on the condition he abide by those rules. (Ooops!)
Saddam was a very, very unique case – even by UN standards.
Catch phrases aside, I’m afraid your ‘theory,’ or ‘hypothesis,’ or ‘conspiracy,’ or whatever the hell you call it, doesn’t fly. Bush or anyone who voted for this war, is no war criminal and even in a kangaroo court like the International Criminal Court, would never be found guilty on those charges. Here's a better catch phrase: political BULLSHIT!
Now if you’ll excuse me, I have to get back to memorizing more conservative talking points...
The fact remains that there was scant "evidence" of WMD, and lots of conjecture. Bush cheerleaders like to overlook the fact that UN inspectors were in Iraq up until two days before the bombs started falling, and found nothing. NOTHING. It was pure hype that built Iraq up into a threat that didn't exist. To top that off, Bush LIED several months after the invasion when he said:
This isn't about prosecuting anyone for crimes. It's about cleansing the government of the weakling senators who failed to oppose what was obviously a HUGE load of bullshit, because they were more worried about looking unpatriotic and not winning re-election. Pussies!
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/07/20030714-3.html
This isn't about prosecuting anyone for crimes. It's about cleansing the government of the weakling senators who failed to oppose what was obviously a HUGE load of bullshit, because they were more worried about looking unpatriotic and not winning re-election. Pussies!
edub69 said:
As always, your mouth isn't doing the talking.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912-1.html
edub69 said:
Devastating retort. I’m bleeding.
Sorry, what part of Bush's speech do you refute – the portions you would consider “lying”? Better still, what parts of the 91 Gulf War ceasefire, did Saddam comply with? Kindly, Google that 'agreement' for us, and point out the discrepancies.
I look forward to your response. Oh, and try not to keep shifting the emphasis of this debate. It only makes you look like a desperate opportunistic partisan hack.
Thank you.
Joe Contrarian said:
What we were told before the war:
Saddam was a menace to society on the verge of exporting chemical weapons
Saddam was indirectly complicit in 9/11
Mohammed Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague while he was actually in Florida
Saddam would nuke America soon if we didn't go to war
The reality:
Saddam had no weapons, weapons capabilities, or infrastructure
Saddam was disengaged, spending most of his time working on his romance novel, and plotting attacks on America wasn't on his radar screen
You can give me all the BS you want about 15 year old UN resolutions that the UN didn't enforce, but the reality is weapons inspectors were sent into Iraq in 2003 before King George ordered airstrikes, and found NOTHING. Yet we still attacked anyway. Idiots like yourself still try to claim that weapons inspectors were being stonewalled, but considering the results of the Iraq Survey Group's 600 million dollar scavenger hunt were nil, it only becomes more apparent that a false picture of Iraq's capabilities was painted.
Doc, this would be an appropriate time for you to post that picture of an ostrich with its head buried in the sand.
edub69 said:
Edub, it’s obvious too much time spent in a foreign country has eroded your English linguistic comprehension.
Bravo! It’s so easy to vilify the administration for things they didn't say, isn’t it? Those aren't quotes you provided, dipshit, rather figments of your imagination. I provided you with a link to a speech, I kindly asked you to address, but unfortunately, what the president actually said on record, doesn't fit your visceral blind, partisan agenda -- which can be summed up, as a dog taking a piss on a Bush campaign sign.
<o
></o>By any chance, are you close friends with those Kerry campaign workers caught slashing tires at GOP headquarters?
