Originally Posted by Truth Detector

Quote:
Originally Posted by Truth Detector
...more partisan obsession...

First and foremost, please do not attribute comments like the above to me when they were not made.



It IS a partisan issue. It is made a partisan issue by the actions of Democrats who see this not as a war on terror or proper enforcement of UN resolutions, but as political opportunism. To suggest otherwise is disingenuous in the extreme.

As for the availability of intelligence, that information was readily available to Democrats on the Intelligence Committee who also saw the SAME threat the previous administration saw, the Republicans saw and this President saw.

You can spin and twist and turn any way you want it. The FACT is clear that a MAJORITY rightly saw Saddam's actions as inconsistent with the UN resolutions and a threat to peace in the region. To suggest that he wasn't is as absurd and as disingenuous as suggesting that this is NOT a partisan issue.

Do yourself a favor and READ the UN resolutions against Iraq, the history leading up to the final warning given to Saddam, Saddam's OWN words before he was executed and the Joint Resolution.

I know you are in PARTISAN denial and don't want to be informed, but even the most myopic child can see the TRUTH beyond the attempts to argue partisan talking points from the Democrat side of the aisle.

Carry on.

Originally Posted by Binary_Digit

Joseph Wilson determined that senior Iraqi officials did in fact patronize Nigerian officials about "expanding commercial relations" and the Niger officials took to be an attempt to acquire uranium. This was 9 months before that SOTU address.

Originally Posted by Tashah

Forget it. My mistake. A lesson learned.

Originally Posted by Truth Detector

Once again we see the same tired old false rhetoric that Bush lied. Yet denial about all the Democrats who uttered the exact same words Bush did the previous administration that uttered the same words and leaders in other nations like Tony Blair who also believed what this Administration believed.

Your standards for what constitutes a lie are a double standard you fail to apply to the party which is apparently of YOUR preference. However, if one has intelligence and uses that intelligence to make their decision, it cannot be construed a lie because in order for it to have been a LIE, one would have to PRESUME we had PERFECT information regarding the issue.

Part TWO of your denial, as well as others who make the same lame arguments, is a willful avoidance of the fact that the Joint Resolution devotes a mere 204 words of a 1,864 word document to WMDs.

Part THREE of your denial, as well as others who make the same lame arguments, is that there was an overwhelming vote for the JOINT resolution which authorized force.

But heck, when you willingly suspend disbelief and purposely direct your anger and hate of war against this President for purely partisan political purposes and political opportunism, I can see why you would continue to wallow in such abject denial.

There are only TWO explanations for such willing political projection and denial; (1) it is due to the misguided Liberal notion that one should NEVER use military force in ANY situation EVER (unless we are directly attacked) and the naive and absurd notion that one can negotiate/reason with terrorists, despots and dictators; and (2) Liberals see the troop deaths as a political opportunity to get back the political power they so desperately desire, even over the safety of the American people and victory against her enemies.

Both of these naive and misguided notions are dangerous in the extreme and do not serve the interests of this nation and only serve to further divide this nation at a time when it should be working together for victory as long as our troops are carrying out their mission and at risk.

But heck, why worry about how our nation is viewed by others when you can denigrate the mission of our military, denigrate this President in a time of war against our enemies, denigrate people of good character for the simple fact that you do not like their politics and denigrate everyone who would continue to support this administrations efforts to protect Americans.

One has to stand on their head to make sense out of such profound stupidity we see coming from these Democrat politicians. But that is the state we find ourselves in, arguing over the notion that Saddam was not a threat (absurd) and that the UN is some efficient political entity that is best able to deal with despots (regardless of it's poor record to the contrary) and the notion one can fight terrorists who are willing to fly civilian airliners into high rise buildings with legal action and police.

Originally Posted by Patrick Henry

Give me convenience, and give me debt.

Originally Posted by Binary_Digit

Bush lies about Iraq (off the top of my head)

1. "We've never been stay the course."

2. "We do not torture."

3. "There was a connection between Iraq and al'Qaeda."

4. "[The centrifuge tubes are] only really suited for uranium enrichment."

5. "They hate us for our freedoms."

6. "Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or chemical weapon to a terrorist or individual terrorists."

7. "We have a smoking gun that could turn into a mushroom cloud."

8. "Intelligence regarding mobile chemical weapons labs came from a solid source."

Every last one of these statements has been proven to be a lie, because intelligence data at the time shows they either weren't true or weren't as certain as Team Bush made them out to be.

Originally Posted by TurtleDude

you clearly don't understand the concept of lies

Originally Posted by bhkad