Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
Rand Paul is not his father. He doesn't represent near the threat to the Republican Party.
The Case Against George W Bush
- Thread starter Formaldehyde
- Start date
I really like the father very much. In fact I wonder how come he managed to be republican while most of his views oppose the mainstream of republicans so much. Incredible.
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
He turned Republican in order to get more publicity for his views. As a libertarian presidential candidate, he was essentially ignored by the media.
His statements during the 2008 Republican debates were classics.
Link to video.
Ron Paul is an excellent example of why we need far more viable political parties than we currently have.
His statements during the 2008 Republican debates were classics.
Link to video.
Ron Paul is an excellent example of why we need far more viable political parties than we currently have.
Berzerker
Deity
If? We're not debating his viability
There is no way Paul will hire the same people he's been criticizing for getting us into Iraq and who'd like to invade Iran next.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Apparently I'm less sure than you are that he is committed to losing.
bathsheba666
Fast 'n Bulbous
I almost miss all the old Iraq war hawks.
You would have thought they would be keen to turn up and reaffirm their old statements.
You would have thought they would be keen to turn up and reaffirm their old statements.
CELTICEMPIRE
Zulu Conqueror
Remember that Hillary Clinton voted for the War in Iraq, and only recently admitted it was a mistake.
Berzerker
Deity
did she admit it after she got primaried by Obama?
she leads from behind waiting for the polls to illuminate her path
and she helped lie us into a war, it was either Lincoln Chafee or the Maryland governor O'Malley who said her vote is a disqualification. She's qualified to sit in prison.
But that aint gonna happen, jail for the little people, not for the ruling elite.
she leads from behind waiting for the polls to illuminate her path
and she helped lie us into a war, it was either Lincoln Chafee or the Maryland governor O'Malley who said her vote is a disqualification. She's qualified to sit in prison.
But that aint gonna happen, jail for the little people, not for the ruling elite.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
72% of Americans were for the war in Iraq, and hardly any of them have admitted they made a mistake. Surprisingly 80% of current Americans were in that 28% just twelve years ago.
Berzerker
Deity
and if those %72 had access to the same intel that number would come down, most people aint so cynical as to sacrifice thousands or millions of people for a war based on lies - but she wasn't exposing or rebutting the lies, she was adding to the pile of garbage.
I remember Hillary claiming her vote was meant to give Bush negotiating power with Saddam when she damn well knew the Bush crowd was going to war.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
I think it has been pretty well demonstrated (and it is the topic of this thread) that the administration provided misleading intel to congress. If you have information that Hillary was running her own private intelligence operations, please provide.
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
The polls on Iraq were all over the place.
Popular opinion in the United States on the invasion of Iraq
In 1992, 55% of the population was in favor of re invading Iraq.
Six months before 9/11, 52% favored invading.
But prior to the war, a majority of Americans wanted a UN mandate to even invade Iraq which never occurred. But two months after we had invaded Iraq without one, a majority were in favor of the invasion.
But by August 2004, 67% thought the war was based on incorrect assumptions, even though the month before 79% thought the war was justified.
However, by June 2005, 60% thought the war should never have been fought in the first place.
What is staggering though is in September 2007 33% of the American public still approved of the way Bush handled the war.
Popular opinion in the United States on the invasion of Iraq
In 1992, 55% of the population was in favor of re invading Iraq.
Six months before 9/11, 52% favored invading.
But prior to the war, a majority of Americans wanted a UN mandate to even invade Iraq which never occurred. But two months after we had invaded Iraq without one, a majority were in favor of the invasion.
But by August 2004, 67% thought the war was based on incorrect assumptions, even though the month before 79% thought the war was justified.
However, by June 2005, 60% thought the war should never have been fought in the first place.
What is staggering though is in September 2007 33% of the American public still approved of the way Bush handled the war.
In the end, Bush proved you can fool 23% of the people 100% of the time.
Berzerker
Deity
She and every other member of Congress had the CIA and experts to inform them, they didn't need WH propaganda. Did she ask Joe Wilson to testify about Nigerian yellowcake? How about Scott Ritter and other weapons inspectors? She couldn't ask the CIA's WH briefer to testify? Did she ask our nuclear experts about the aluminum tubes allegedly designed for enriching mat'l? The fix was in and members of Congress were reluctant to get in the way - especially politicians with presidential aspirations.
Didn't you or Form say Hillary just went along to get along? She voted for that war to be viable, her problem was the house of cards had already started collapsing by the time she was facing Obama in the primaries. She's a despicable person, she has the blood of thousands on her hands.
I might be a paranoid maniac, but perhaps W's ‘let's invade’ thing was based on the soundest of economic theories, namely spillover economics? Something along the lines of ‘If we make the arms industry richer then the US population will have more jerbswhich will make 'Merica great and we'll have cheap fuel’ might have helped convince those idiots that what they were doing was Right and Patriotic.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
The CIA is executive branch. They don't work for congress. How do you think the administration and congress interact?
The administration presented their case. No, congress did not ask for confirmation testimony directly from randomly chosen members of the intelligence departments of the administration. Not that it would have done any good, since anyone in the intelligence community that didn't end every report they made with "and that's why we need to invade Iraq" had been shipped to BFE. That's where the whole "case for having mislead the country to war" issue comes from.
The heads of every department involved; defense, state, the directors of the CIA and NSA; every one of those guys and their deputies where forwarding reports that supported one conclusion, and quashing any investigation that might lead to a different conclusion. (probably including investigations of Saudis from some small time organization called al Queda that had no known ties to Iraq who were taking flying lessons, of all the weird things). Bottom line, there was no intel above the collection level that contradicted the administration's desired outcome, for congress or anyone else.
When low level operatives tried to end run the administration and blow the whistle we see what happened to them. Sure, we can say "why didn't they ask Joe Wilson?" The answer is that he was a bottom tier operative feeding information up the chain who at that point didn't even know that since his info didn't "fit" it was being glossed over or discarded outright. At that point congress had never heard of him in any context but "one of our many data collectors who's input contributed to this report." It took years afterwards to sort out the Joe Wilson business. Hindsight is a marvelous thing, but at the time no one recognized the extent of the "massaging" that the data was receiving, or had any reason to expect it.
onejayhawk
Afflicted with reason
What's Obama's number?
Why is that staggering? Bush was never an extremist in any sense of the word.
J
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
You mean other than being directly responsible for the deaths of well over 200,000 people in Iraq, most of them civilians, based on his campaign of lies and deceit? Not to mention being directly responsible for the torture and/or murder of hundreds of completely innocent people?
But I never called him an "extremist". Now did I?
But now that you mention it, the term certainly seems to apply to many of those who still try to rationalize his reprehensible and quite extreme acts.
Timsup2nothin
Deity
- Joined
- Apr 2, 2013
- Messages
- 46,737
Because the question had nothing to do with whether Bush was an extremist. The question was about the total cock-up that was the invasion of Iraq. That in September of 2007 there was anyone left that hadn't recognized that as what it was is pretty startling.
Obama has proven that the Bush 23% can stay deranged 100% of the time.
