Originally posted by TS FAN
View Post
Learning through News Reports
Collapse
X
-
-
-
No what I'm saying is the Bush administration knew it's a lie but, told them anyway. Had they told them the truth they never would have voted for it but, the war hogs wanted to go,to war with Saddam. I guess you guys can't agree to disagree on this one. Must not want your side to look bad because you never make no mistake ever. I get it.Originally posted by mudslinger47 View PostBut isn't that exactly what your doing?
Comment
-
That's not true in my case, Kid, and I think you know that, too. I never had any particular affinity for Bush but I cannot believe he had a disregard for lives and revenue or held malicious intent when he sent the country to war. You obviously do believe that, and that's a pretty serious charge to make with nothing more than a hunch and a strong dislike of Bush.Originally posted by kidrock View PostPolitician do these things for mostly political reasons. I'm not sure where the president no matter who it is is obligated to visit any of them but, I would have figured he would have visited the Steinle family since he was pushing immigration. Like I said I feel bad for the Steinle family because this should have never have happened.
As far as giving you creditable sources on the Iraq war you have to be kidding right. No matter what sources I site you guys will discredit like always so, no I won't be doing that. Remeber your guys source is the only source that matters.
I have watch ss12 give sources on some of the things he's talking about and always well that's not credible source. So won't be doing that anymore. Just not worth my time. Like I said we will have to agree to disagree and move on.
The bottom line on the Steinly affair is this. I DO NOT believe G.W. Bush would been silent following the scum bag DHS secretary's human garbage response to a legitimate question. I also do not believe he would have failed to contact the family because of political spite, even if the politics of the situation had been diametrically opposed to his beliefs. He may not have been a great President but he is a fair and compassionate man.
Can you say the same for hussein? Not with a straight face and clear conscience you can't!
Comment
-
No we can't, because that wasn't the way it was... "W" and the Senate and Congressional leaders were briefed at the same time.... Diane Feinstein explained this to the tea when you Democrats first started throwing stones....she herself said it was a BS charge.... Domestically "W" sucked for the most part, but his world view was spot on!!Originally posted by kidrock View PostNo what I'm saying is the Bush administration knew it's a lie but, told them anyway. Had they told them the truth they never would have voted for it but, the war hogs wanted to go,to war with Saddam. I guess you guys can't agree to disagree on this one. Must not want your side to look bad because you never make no mistake ever. I get it.
Comment
-
Kid, there is absolutely no proof on your Bush accusations. Not a hint of proof. If you want to debate whether we should have gone to war, then debate it. However you did not follow the trail of the Sadam ploy. He played a game of chicken with Bush and lost. He sent the weapons to Syria and could have prevented the attack. He was warned with our battleships at his door to allow us to inspect. Remember that???? Warned right before the attack. He could have let us in to inspect and there would not have been a conflict. But no, he couldn't stand to look weak in the eyes of the people in the Country and I guess he thought he could bluff us down. BTW, The Clinton administration knew he had weapons. The Bush lied nonsense, has no merit.Originally posted by kidrock View PostNo what I'm saying is the Bush administration knew it's a lie but, told them anyway. Had they told them the truth they never would have voted for it but, the war hogs wanted to go,to war with Saddam. I guess you guys can't agree to disagree on this one. Must not want your side to look bad because you never make no mistake ever. I get it.
Comment
-
What kidrock does not point out when he says everything is done for political reasons is, that the Democrats successfully ran a smear campaign on the Republicans and Bush, using the war as their tool. And they always find a way of misdirecting all of the blame by creating lies, distorting the truth, omitting the truth, and the blame is the tool that gets it done for them. The Democrat party can not win on it's own merits anymore since they have gone total socialist and Communist. They must try to control the narrative and misdirect blame on any issue they can, They also turn everything into a political issue on purpose.Originally posted by mudslinger47 View PostNo we can't, because that wasn't the way it was... "W" and the Senate and Congressional leaders were briefed at the same time.... Diane Feinstein explained this to the tea when you Democrats first started throwing stones....she herself said it was a BS charge.... Domestically "W" sucked for the most part, but his world view was spot on!!
Many people are so confused that some of them don't even know what to believe or not to believe anymore. And many make uneducated and foolish choices on who and what to believe. Thus the Democrat party continues to survive, but they know that they must recruit new voters (illegal aliens and refugees) to replenish their dying base.
Comment
-
All sounds good but it was a big fat lie. Yes I could put up a few sources on here but, I already know what will happen. So if he sent the weapons to Syria why did we go to war with him. They were watching that country like a hawk and don't you think they would have spotted them moving WMD's to Syria. It was a big fat lie that the war hogs sold congress and the American public.Originally posted by TS FAN View PostKid, there is absolutely no proof on your Bush accusations. Not a hint of proof. If you want to debate whether we should have gone to war, then debate it. However you did not follow the trail of the Sadam ploy. He played a game of chicken with Bush and lost. He sent the weapons to Syria and could have prevented the attack. He was warned with our battleships at his door to allow us to inspect. Remember that???? Warned right before the attack. He could have let us in to inspect and there would not have been a conflict. But no, he couldn't stand to look weak in the eyes of the people in the Country and I guess he thought he could bluff us down. BTW, The Clinton administration knew he had weapons. The Bush lied nonsense, has no merit.
Comment
-
It was not no big fat lie.Originally posted by kidrock View PostAll sounds good but it was a big fat lie. Yes I could put up a few sources on here but, I already know what will happen. So if he sent the weapons to Syria why did we go to war with him. They were watching that country like a hawk and don't you think they would have spotted them moving WMD's to Syria. It was a big fat lie that the war hogs sold congress and the American public.
What kidrock does not point out when he says everything is done for political reasons is, that the Democrats successfully ran a smear campaign on the Republicans and Bush, using the war as their tool. And they always find a way of misdirecting all of the blame by creating lies, distorting the truth, omitting the truth, and the blame is the tool that gets it done for them. The Democrat party can not win on it's own merits anymore since they have gone total socialist and Communist. They must try to control the narrative and misdirect blame on any issue they can, They also turn everything into a political issue on purpose.
Many people are so confused that some of them don't even know what to believe or not to believe anymore. And many make uneducated and foolish choices on who and what to believe. Thus the Democrat party continues to survive, but they know that they must recruit new voters (illegal aliens and refugees) to replenish their dying base.
Comment
Comment