GW's got some rope a dope skills..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hew

Yeah, you wouldn't want to wear out Google and get your answer yourself...particularly when it doesn't agree with your preconceived notion.

---

OK, then. I'll answer for you:

We went to war because Iraq had 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'. Turns out they did not. Turns out that lots of folks in the intelligence community didn't think they did. Turns out the Bush admin cherrypicked the data that supported their claims, while ignoring what didn't.
False pretense.

I think anyone who voted for the war shares the blame, though it's impossible to imagine a scenario where we would have gone in had the Bush admin not led the charge.

FWIW - Somehow the entire delegation from my little hayseed state was able to see that the 'intelligence' was absolute crap. That's cold comfort, though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hew

And the Senate was even more bipartisan, with a plurality of democrats voting to invade Iraq...including Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, John Kerry, John Edwards, Tom Daschle, Chuck Schumer, and Dianne Feinstein. But it's "Bush's war of false pretense." :rolleyes:

---

U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 107th Congress - 2nd Session

as compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the Senate

Vote Summary

Question: On the Joint Resolution (H.J.Res. 114 )
Vote Number: 237 Vote Date: October 11, 2002, 12:50 AM
Required For Majority: 1/2 Vote Result: Joint Resolution Passed
Measure Number: H.J.Res. 114
Measure Title: A joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against Iraq.
Vote Counts: YEAs 77 NAYs 23

http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LI...n=2&vote=00237

Nearly every democrat who has run for president and was in that senate at the time voted for the war in Iraq ...that's interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by K.Bullock

Nearly every democrat who has run for president and was in that senate at the time voted for the war in Iraq ...that's interesting.

---

Because they had political aspirations, and didn't want to get branded as 'soft' or 'anti-war'. They saw what happened politically to those who voted against the first Gulf War (no one who voted against ever had a shot at the Presidency because of their opposition). And, they bought the whole WMD story hook line and sinker, thinking that 'liberating' Iraq would be just like liberating Kuwait.

Pathetic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by backpasture

OK, then. I'll answer for you:

We went to war because Iraq had 'Weapons of Mass Destruction'. Turns out they did not. Turns out that lots of folks in the intelligence community didn't think they did. Turns out the Bush admin cherrypicked the data that supported their claims, while ignoring what didn't.
False pretense.

I think anyone who voted for the war shares the blame, though it's impossible to imagine a scenario where we would have gone in had the Bush admin not led the charge.

FWIW - Somehow the entire delegation from my little hayseed state was able to see that the 'intelligence' was absolute crap. That's cold comfort, though.

---

Whoa there "Big Shooter",

No reason to attempt to rewrite history to those who have lived and payed attention over the past few years.
You seem to be forgetting the numerous UN mandates that Saddam thumbed his nose at such as the weapons inspectors and violations of the No Fly Zones. Then there was also a little matter of the UN allowing him to sell oil for food to keep his people from starving which he diverted to further his own ambitions.
Lady Hillary and her tag along Bill, had spoken numerous times about the certainty that Saddam did indeed possess WMD.

You have to hand it to Saddam, he did fool the whole world, and most importantly he kept Iran at bay by fooling them too.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by backpasture

Because they had political aspirations, and didn't want to get branded as 'soft' or 'anti-war'. They saw what happened politically to those who voted against the first Gulf War (no one who voted against ever had a shot at the Presidency because of their opposition). And, they bought the whole WMD story hook line and sinker, thinking that 'liberating' Iraq would be just like liberating Kuwait.

Pathetic.

---

Doesn't the above pretty much gut your argument that it was a war sold on false pretense?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by backpasture

Because they had political aspirations, and didn't want to get branded as 'soft' or 'anti-war'. They saw what happened politically to those who voted against the first Gulf War (no one who voted against ever had a shot at the Presidency because of their opposition). And, they bought the whole WMD story hook line and sinker, thinking that 'liberating' Iraq would be just like liberating Kuwait.

Pathetic.

---

What would be pathetic is for anyone to support a Political Party whose members would vote for going to war BECAUSE of the above text.

Pathetic indeed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hew

Doesn't the above pretty much gut your argument that it was a war sold on false pretense?

---

Um, no.

Bush sold it on false pretense. Congress bought it on false pretense.

There were a susbstantial number of people in Congress (and elsewhere) who did NOT buy it. Many of those who voted FOR did it for political expediency. Others did it because they bought what they were sold rather than digging deeper.

Regardless of the reason, those that voted FOR the war made the wrong decision.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captain Mike D

What would be pathetic is for anyone to support a Political Party whose members would vote for going to war BECAUSE of the above text.

Pathetic indeed.

---

Ya. That would be pathetic. In fact, just voting for a Political Party is pathetic, IMO. Which is why I vote for candidates, not parties.

And, I haven't voted for any candidate that voted for the war. For me, a vote for the war shows that you don't have the judgement necessary to hold high office.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Captain Mike D

You have to hand it to Saddam, he did fool the whole world, and most importantly he kept Iran at bay by fooling them too.

---

He didn't fool the whole world. But, he fooled enough of the fools running our government.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by backpasture

Remind me why we were told we had to invade Iraq again....?

---

Because Bush wouldn't simply state that Iraq had violated the agreement signed at the end of Gulf War I. He felt that he needed to further justify going to war.

Everytime I read about them firing at our planes or refusing to let us inspect a building, I wondered why we wouldn't enforce the agreement. I always believed that we should have flattended any building that they refused to let us inspect. Looks like we have the upper hand in Iraq now. Wonder if Obama will try to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

PS a mission is a specific action during a conflict, not the entire conflict. It can be as small as one person collecting intel. When GWB said "Mission Accomplished" he was correct. The Iraqi military was completely routed.