• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

George W. Bush Is Intervening in Iraq—Again

The fact that you can't distinguish the difference between lis that harm people, and lies that don't, doesn't surprise me!
Clearly he did distinguish between the nuances of different lies from different Presidents. Your post here makes no sense at all other than you completely denying that this President lies for political objectives which envariably will harm people.
 
But Obama was only following the deal Bush made when he pulled the troops out, so it isn't his fault.

It's a lovely way to live, no personal responsibility, no burdens, no guilt, no friends......

As opposed to "How dare you take credit for Bush's accomplish.... oh, wait! It didn't turn out well! It was all your idea, then."

I suppose that comes with the territory when you're elected president.
 
He's right. If these lies are so well known surely theres a better source?

Rather than simply dealing with the lies, you summarily dismiss them all by condemning the source. As if somehow the source is the lie

Prove the lies wrong or run along.
 
Last edited:
You are the one hollering "Bush lied". Yet you cannot come up with one in your own words. :waiting:

Don't need to. It's all right there. Have the stones to prove them wrong. Oh wait, you can't.
 
Rather than simply dealing with the lies, you summarily dismiss them all by condemning the source. As if somehow the source is the lie

Prove the lies wrong or run along.

He has a point. David Corn on GWB = Rush Limbaugh on BHO.
 
The fact that you can't distinguish the difference between lis that harm people, and lies that don't, doesn't surprise me!

Obviously you cannot. Nixon's lies led to his resigning from office in shame to avoid impeachment proceedings. Then he was gone.....no more harm. Hillary's lies in regards to Bosnia show that her sanity is in question. She is likely to be running for president in 2016. A lot of harm can certainly come if she were to manage getting elected.
 
As opposed to "How dare you take credit for Bush's accomplish.... oh, wait! It didn't turn out well! It was all your idea, then."

I suppose that comes with the territory when you're elected president.

You are continuing to miss out on the fact that Bush never intended for all of the troops to be pulled out. He envisioned a status of forces agreement that would keep around 20,000 troops remaining behind. Obama simply gave lip service to a SOFA leaving troops behind and lowered his offer to a number that the Iraqi prime minister did not consider worth the political risk. Obama had no desire to leave troops behind. And then he declared victory and took credit for it as he was pulling out the troops. The reality is that not leaving troops behind is why ISIS virtually controls Iraq now.
 
Don't need to. It's all right there. Have the stones to prove them wrong. Oh wait, you can't.

You have been asked to point out just one lie...in your own words....and be specific. Obviously you lack the stones to back up your own accusations. I and everyone else will have to conclude that you cannot. I doubt you even read the article you posted. You are merely attempting to use google as an escape route.

:waiting:
 
You have been asked to point out just one lie...in your own words....and be specific. Obviously you lack the stones to back up your own accusations. I and everyone else will have to conclude that you cannot.:

The only one lacking the stones is you and the rest of your ilk. Anyone that would suggest Bush was somehow different that every other sitting president is either naive or just not very smart.
 
You are continuing to miss out on the fact that Bush never intended for all of the troops to be pulled out. He envisioned a status of forces agreement that would keep around 20,000 troops remaining behind. Obama simply gave lip service to a SOFA leaving troops behind and lowered his offer to a number that the Iraqi prime minister did not consider worth the political risk. Obama had no desire to leave troops behind. And then he declared victory and took credit for it as he was pulling out the troops. The reality is that not leaving troops behind is why ISIS virtually controls Iraq now.

Obama could have simply said, "screw you" to the Iraqi parliament and kept an occupational force behind despite their having overwhelmingly voted for the US forces to leave, but then, there was the fiction that we had actually created a democratic republic in the Middle East to support.
 
Oh God...please no. He left a big enough mess the first time around. The last thing this country needs is GWB and/or his neo-con bedmates getting involved in Iraq again. The Bush family has priors in sending US arms covertly to rebel forces....you think we would learn from our previous mistakes.

ISIL is invading the territories of these tribes and killing all their people, and they, in desperation, went to Bush for help. My heart goes out to them. There was a day when the US would have offered them some help.
 
The fact that you can't distinguish the difference between lis that harm people, and lies that don't, doesn't surprise me!
So is it a matter of Democrat Lies Good - Republican Lies Bad?

The Left has never held BHO responsible for his lies, and have only because to do so recently because they are becoming too obvious, and too dangerous, to ignore until quite recently. But it's too late now. He should have been dismissed at his first campaign attempt.
 
ISIL is invading the territories of these tribes and killing all their people, and they, in desperation, went to Bush for help. My heart goes out to them. There was a day when the US would have offered them some help.
Obama can't even call the murderers Muslims or the victims Christians. Most everyone but American leftists see the tragedies accruing in these regions, and the dangers spreading throughout the world.
 
And you got 935. Pick as many as you'd like.

Nope. I am not asking a web site. I am asking you. If Bush lied, you should easily be able to pick one specific lie and talk about it. Obviously you can't. I am calling your bluff.
 
And I would say the next 18 months left in Obama's presidency can be devastating if he continues on the crooked path he has chosen. I am fed up to my eyeballs with his unwillingness to call these people Islamic terrorists. I am appalled at what lengths he will go to make a deal with Iran giving away the store in the process. I am fed up with our people having to flee embassies due to jihadist takeovers in certain parts of the world because of his fecklessness. And if that young female bimbo from the State Department gives one more press conference, I might kick my television.
What a moron! Her name is Jen Paski.
477654965-state-department-spokeswoman-jen-psaki-is-gettyimages.jpg


I have never in my life seen anyone dance around a direct question as she has. What a flake. Which leads me to believe that just about everyone envolved in foreign affairs within this administration are flakes and that is why we are at greater risk than ever before.
Obama refuses to refer to the recent massacre of Egyptian Christians as Christians, instead he refers to them as Egyptians. He refuses to aid Greece and Jordan fight against ISIS while allying himself with Saudi who funds ISIS.
 
Obama can't even call the murderers Muslims or the victims Christians. Most everyone but American leftists see the tragedies accruing in these regions, and the dangers spreading throughout the world.

Probably because most of the victims are Muslims as well.
 
Then name one such lie specifically.

if they're so discredible just picking one should be so difficult for you. You want to make this about the source as opposed to the lies. Hard to blame you.
 
LOL !!!

Yes, the Democrats were gullible and weak and scared.

Actually they were patriotic Americans who foolishly believed the President was also. When a President is seditious our system does not work as the founders desired. There is far too much evidence that GW ignored CIA warnings and allowed 911 to happen for the purpose of invading Iraq. He also lied to the American people about his ambitions which was to oust Saddam from day one of his Presidency.
 
Last edited:
The only one lacking the stones is you and the rest of your ilk. Anyone that would suggest Bush was somehow different that every other sitting president is either naive or just not very smart.

The difference is that if you ask me to point out a specific lie told by Obama, I will do so and give specifics. As will everyone else you are ranting at. You are the one who after hollering "Bush lied" has failed to back it up.
 
Back
Top Bottom