Skip to main content

Since there seems to be a penchant for our Liberal friends to dwell in the "Bush did it" history, then I guess a little history lesson wouldn't hurt...although I would rather move forward... Wink

Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction


"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 Bill 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 Bill 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: -- Democratic Senators 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

Now, I could be wrong, seeing as I got my education in Alabama...but, wasn't this the Pre-Bush years?
Surely that's not the same Nancy Pelosi!

More?

"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 th! e 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 seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. 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 always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (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." -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without 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 is miscalculating America's response to his 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

Oh...by the way, this didn't come from FOX Wink
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

quote:
Originally posted by CageTheElephant:
Since there seems to be a penchant for our Liberal friends to dwell in the "Bush did it" history, then I guess a little history lesson wouldn't hurt...although I would rather move forward... Wink

Democrat Quotes on Iraq Weapons of Mass Destruction


"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 Bill 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 Bill 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: -- Democratic Senators 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

Now, I could be wrong, seeing as I got my education in Alabama...but, wasn't this the Pre-Bush years?
Surely that's not the same Nancy Pelosi!

More?

"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 th! e 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 seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. 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 always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." -- Sen. Jay Rockefeller (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." -- Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002

"Without 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 is miscalculating America's response to his 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

Oh...by the way, this didn't come from FOX Wink


Well I will have to guess where it came from since you didn't reveal it BUT these qoutes from Democratic leaders led to HOW many lives lost in Iraq? Is that the next step for the republican/Fox attempt to rewrite the Bush legacy, blame it on the Democrats????
Most of these response were from faulty intelligence information. Bush and co. suppressed evidence to the contrary to get Congress and others to go along with his plan of a preemptive strike.

Shall we re-visit what General Powell had to say about that after he was duped into presenting the "evidence" to the UN?

And were there WMD's? What logical reasoning did Bush have for pulling troops out of Afghanistan that were pursuing the actual culprit behind 911?
quote:
Sez jank:
Most of these response were from faulty intelligence information. Bush and co. suppressed evidence to the contrary to get Congress and others to go along with his plan of a preemptive strike.

Shall we re-visit what General Powell had to say about that after he was duped into presenting the "evidence" to the UN?

And were there WMD's? What logical reasoning did Bush have for pulling troops out of Afghanistan that were pursuing the actual culprit behind 911?



Roll Eyes Again...

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 Bill 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 Bill 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: -- Democratic Senators 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

Now, I could be wrong, seeing as I got my education in Alabama...but, wasn't this the Pre-Bush years?
Surely that's not the same Nancy Pelosi!
quote:
Originally posted by CageTheElephant:
quote:
Sez jank:
Most of these response were from faulty intelligence information. Bush and co. suppressed evidence to the contrary to get Congress and others to go along with his plan of a preemptive strike.

Shall we re-visit what General Powell had to say about that after he was duped into presenting the "evidence" to the UN?

And were there WMD's? What logical reasoning did Bush have for pulling troops out of Afghanistan that were pursuing the actual culprit behind 911?



Roll Eyes Again...

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 Bill 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 Bill 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: -- Democratic Senators 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

Now, I could be wrong, seeing as I got my education in Alabama...but, wasn't this the Pre-Bush years?
Surely that's not the same Nancy Pelosi!



AGAIN Roll Eyes HOW MANY LIVES DID THESE STATEMENTS COST IN IRAQ?????????
I have never understood why some people don't want to just admit that Bush made many many mistakes while he was President. What is up with that. Why can't we point out the things he did that pushed us into the mess we are in today?

I don't lay it all at his feet by no means. Clinton and Bush 1 and before him Reagan also played their part. Why does Republicans want us to completely disregard what Bush 2 did?

By their logic nothing is Clinton's fault either...how can we blame him for anything that happened after the year 2000. He was no longer president so it doesn't count right?

Also by most of their logic within hours of President Obama taking office it was all his fault and if he couldn't turn it all around in 2 years then he has failed. Roll Eyes

Its insanity really. Mass insanity.
quote:
By their logic nothing is Clinton's fault either...how can we blame him for anything that happened after the year 2000. He was no longer president so it doesn't count right?

Actually, that is the dem claim. That started the moment Bush took over. See how that continues to play forward?

Bush made mistakes, defending the country after 9/11 is not a mistake.
b50m,

So where does it end? Do you want to be one of the ones that keeps up the insanity? I don't.

I never said that defending our country was one of his mistakes. However the invasion of a country based on falsified evidence is not the same thing. I was 100% behind Bush when he sent our troops to Afghanistan. That is where we knew the enemy was. When he weakened our defenses there by pulling troops and resources to attack Iraq he lost me and many others. Including a large number of would be allies. Now there are those that say they don't care what the rest of the world thinks of us, I say we had better care. Our safety, reputation and economy have been badly damaged due to the Bush administrations thumbing of his nose at the rest of the world.

I can say that one of my biggest disappointments in President Obama has been his slow movement on ending our occupation of Iraq and not completely shutting down Gitmo. Whether you agree with that or not is your right, but I for one grew up believing that our country was better than that. We stood for human rights and freedom. Not rounding up "possible" enemies and holding them for years without any solid proof or even a trial. Nor did our government have the right to listen to my private phone calls or read my mail, arrest me and hold me without a charge and without counsel. The patriot act was another disappointment to me. These were the wrongs that I hoped Obama would right. So far he hasn't done what he promised.

I agree with Benjamin Franklin on this:
"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

The world is a dangerous place no matter what we do. I for one do not want to keep loosing freedoms for a false sense of security. If our enemies want to attack us they will find a way, regardless of where our troops are in the world or what freedoms we give up in the name of safety. Its called reality.
quote:
However the invasion of a country based on falsified evidence is not the same thing

See, that is where we disagree. You say falsified, I don't think so.

Obama found out that the 'reality' of running the country was not as easy as he thought it was. If closing Gitmo was possible, Bush would have already done it. Those prisoners have to go somewhere. It's either on US soil, which nobody wants, or back to their home countries where they will be heroes or to other countries who will execute them. You can't fight a war with proper rules when the enemy has no rules. No uniforms, no order, no decency. Using children, women and religious sites as cover is despicable.

If Bush caused the rest of the world to hate us, Obama has caused the rest of the world to laugh at us. When the French pres is telling you to 'man up', you are in trouble.
The countries that hate us are the terrorist ones. They should hate us.

Obama could have had 'don't ask don't tell' settled just a few weeks ago, he balked.
He found out that what he wants and what the liberals want is in opposition to what the military wants.

Obama also extended the rules of the Patriot Act, so he was a full blown hypocrite on that one. As for me, it's not a big deal. Unless I'm calling Yemen, nobody is going to be listening.
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:
quote:
However the invasion of a country based on falsified evidence is not the same thing

See, that is where we disagree. You say falsified, I don't think so.


You have jumped around so much that I am going to have to take this in sections. Smiler

First what is your reasoning that the information of WMD's was not false? Did we find them? Have you read the reports on this?

quote:
Obama found out that the 'reality' of running the country was not as easy as he thought it was.


I agree.
quote:
If closing Gitmo was possible, Bush would have already done it. Those prisoners have to go somewhere. It's either on US soil, which nobody wants, or back to their home countries where they will be heroes or to other countries who will execute them.


He was the one that opened it. We should have never had the vast majority of the prisoners we had there. Not to mention the secret prisons in other countries. This is not the American way. As far as them being kept in prisons here on US soil I know of at least one town that wanted them, they even built a prison with them in mind. They wanted the income the government would have to pay to house them. If we are going to just let people who have not been tried or had any counsel waste away in a prison cell then why would you care if they were sent to another country and hanged. Either way their lives are over. Some may deserve it. We don't know because we have not given them a trial. If they are guilty of war crimes then kill them...if not set them free. The bad part is that if we rounded up innocent people with no agenda against the US and imprisoned them for all these years you can sure bet they have an agenda against us now.

quote:
You can't fight a war with proper rules when the enemy has no rules. No uniforms, no order, no decency. Using children, women and religious sites as cover is despicable.


We have fought this kind of war before. It was called Vietnam. We apparently learn nothing.

quote:
If Bush caused the rest of the world to hate us, Obama has caused the rest of the world to laugh at us. When the French pres is telling you to 'man up', you are in trouble.
The countries that hate us are the terrorist ones. They should hate us.


I for one have not seen the rest of the world laughing at us. That is something I have only heard from the right. When Obama was elected I went to Germany a few weeks later. Everyone I talked to was so happy that America had elected him and felt that he would finally help us gain our good reputation back. They all thought of Bush as a tyrant and a dangerous leader. No one was laughing. It was more of a sigh of relief. Germany is in no way a terrorist country. I find it funny that now the right cares what France has to say. When they were not willing to back our invasion of Iraq, they were called cowards...now we should listen to what they have to say about our President? I am also unsure as to which time you are talking about. The French President has said many things against our President...mostly over Iran sanctions.

quote:
Obama could have had 'don't ask don't tell' settled just a few weeks ago, he balked.
He found out that what he wants and what the liberals want is in opposition to what the military wants.


I agree. I think he should hurry up and do something before the religious right can block it. I know that US Secretary of Defense Gates is for the repeal so maybe it will happen. I read that Obama said he wanted to wait on a report the Military is doing that is due in early December before he does anything. I can go with that. Any good president would take those things into account before making such a move.

quote:
Obama also extended the rules of the Patriot Act, so he was a full blown hypocrite on that one.


I guess you didn't read where I said basically the same thing. I am disappointed in Obama for this. It is not what he said he would do if he gained office.

quote:
As for me, it's not a big deal. Unless I'm calling Yemen, nobody is going to be listening.


There is where we differ greatly. I am not willing to give up personal privacy rights and freedoms for a false sense of security. The Patriot act is much more far reaching than just listening to our phone conversations. It is completely unconstitutional.
If the Patriot Act is unconstitutional, why has no one repealed it form either party?

In the leaked wikipapaers, it mentioned WMD's being found. Many of our allies also agreed on WMD's. Given that Saddam had plenty of warning of an attack, really stupid on our part, he easily got rid of the evidence.

quote:
Also:
http://www.meforum.org/755/syr...owing-syrian-missile
Iraqi Weapons in Syria?

While Western governments were able to pressure Moscow to alter its weapons shipments, Bashar al-Assad may not have limited himself to over-the-counter weapons purchases. The Syrian military's unconventional weapons arsenal already has a significant stockpile of sarin. The Syrian regime has also attempted to produce other toxic agents in order to advance its inventory of biological weapons.[22]

Several different intelligence sources raised red flags about suspicious truck convoys from Iraq to Syria in the days, weeks, and months prior to the March 2003 invasion of Iraq.[23]

These concerns first became public when, on December 23, 2002, Ariel Sharon stated on Israeli television, "Chemical and biological weapons which Saddam is endeavoring to conceal have been moved from Iraq to Syria."[24] About three weeks later, Israel's foreign minister repeated the accusation.[25] The U.S., British, and Australian governments issued similar statements. [26]

The Syrian foreign minister dismissed such charges as a U.S. attempt to divert attention from its problems in Iraq.[27] But even if the Syrian regime were sincere, Bashar al-Assad's previous statement—"I don't do everything in this country,"[28]—suggested that Iraqi chemical or biological weapons could cross the Syrian frontier without regime consent. Rather than exculpate the Syrian regime, such a scenario makes the presence of Iraqi weapons in Syria more worrisome, for it suggests that Assad might either eschew responsibility for their ultimate custody or may not actually be able to prevent their transfer to terrorist groups that enjoy close relations with officials in his regime.


We will never agree on this one, and history will take many years before the facts are all revealed.

As for North Vietnam, there was a legitimate military to fight. The Vietcong were like the terrorists, blending in, but even they had a loose military unit.
Last edited by b50m
quote:
Originally posted by rocky:
Well I will have to guess where it came from since you didn't reveal it BUT these qoutes from Democratic leaders led to HOW many lives lost in Iraq? Is that the next step for the republican/Fox attempt to rewrite the Bush legacy, blame it on the Democrats????


I get it. "Bush lied. People died." The thing is, Bush didn't lie. From friends and acquaintances who were "over there," Iraq DID have WMD's Saddam used WMD's on his own people. US Army (Retired) Major General Gary Harrell said, and I quote, "If anyone tells you there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, they're either lying or they're stupid." Mr. Harrell's men found proof of WMD manufacturing. Let's see. . . The UN gave Iraq two weeks to prepare for the inspection. That's PLENTY of time to transport stuff to Syria, which is exactly what they did.

Get off your "Everything is Bush's Fault" high horse and take some responsibility for the failed policies and agenda of your party.
You want to be outraged over war-time fatalities?!? Try this one on. 291,557 American deaths occurred in battle during World War II. Another 113,842 deaths were recorded off the battlefield. That's 405,399 total American lives lost in LESS THAN five years. That's over 400,000 MORE THAN the Global War On Terrorism.

Now, a little closer to home. . . Between 1994 and 2007, over 40,000 Americans died per year in automobile-related accidents. There's little outrage over this fact.

Regardless, your argument is tired and unsubstantiated.
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:
If the Patriot Act is unconstitutional, why has no one repealed it form either party?



There have been parts of the original act that Bush signed into law that have been knocked down by the courts. Here is just one example after a quick search Patriot Act ruling However I remember thinking when it was first introduced that if he got this through Congress we would never get those freedoms back. The only congressmen that opposed it were Leahy and Fiengold I think. Bush did more harm to our freedoms and liberties than any president before or so far after. I now blame Obama for not doing more to repeal it. Both dems and repubs are equally responsible for this. It is much harder to get rights back then it is to have them taken away.

There are those that say because of terrorism we should be willing to give up certain rights and freedoms. I do not agree. When we do that the terrorist have already won.
What drastic dichotomy. The RepubTeaCons defend BushII as though he was divinely inspired to got to Iraq, they proudly and willingly give up their rights in order to further the police action on terror, yet they have no faith that the government is spending their money properly. Its like when they bloviate about the need to follow the intentions of the founding fathers, except the part about women and blacks getting to vote. That must be a hard ideology to live with.
quote:
Originally posted by b50m:
You mean you don't want blacks and women to vote? Whoa, I need to rescind about 30 years of votes.

You think Bush is an idiot yet want Obama to go into Iran for no reason at all.

That must be a hard ideology to live with.


If our nation was ruled by the COnstitution as envisioned by the Founding Fathers, you would not be voting, that is correct.

BushIIe is self-absorbed dolt.

I said nothing about OBama directing the military to Iran, only that currently, thats where the support system for the terrorists is situated. Is the US serious about ending the al Qaeda threat???
OBama may very well go there before the next election, wagging the dog and such.
Well now wait a minute, a few posts ago one of your "compatriots or comrades or whatever you want to call a rightwing radical" stated in a post that FDR took us into WWII. Do you consider the progressive policies of FDR right wing conservative b50m?????? And before you answer it you better remember the CCC and other public works programs which saved the economy and the nation. WHO was president when the US went to war with Japan?????????? And no I won't say: BUSH DID IT! Big Grin

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×