Republicans DO fight back! Hey G-World, put this in your pipe!

Video shows hipocrasy of American Left

Click Play.

I just wish they would have thrown a Putin Chirac clip in their as well. Enjoy!

 

Thank you! Let's see what follows...

 

Maybe it's just me but I fail to see how Democrats stating Saddam was a danger has to do with the overall case of what went on?

Who ever disputed Saddam was a danger? If dems totally change their speaches than find rake them over the coals, makes no difference to me on what a dem said or did not say.

 

Isn't this what exactly democrats and some republicans complain about?

How they were fooled by Bush & Dick team to believe something which was not true but a fantasy created by government manipulation of intelligence data.

Anyway, to complain about it now doesn't take away their responsibility and lack of judgment to so easily be fooled. Shame on anyone who was fooled by the lies or went along with the lies to protect his/her political career.

 

Well I cannot help it if it means nothing to you that the demoRATS being complete hack fuckhead weiners now, were supportive of the efforts in the beginning....

 

hmm, not realy if they were rake them over the coals as well, I don't see how that however derails many others disapproval of the war and how it was carried out.

Many of the statements however is a total distortion, nobody was saying Saddam was not dangerous, not all congressman also had the same intel the president saw, only what he wished them to see, sorry but I see it as a very weak argument. Dems who changed statements fine rake them over the coals, it however does not in my eyes back up the president in anyway shape or form.

 

Your such a tool Gworld, many of the clips were from before bush was in office, are you either retarded, an idiot, or blind.

 

Figures, you play a tape of a demoRAT saying something and he/she will look you in the eye and claim, "I never said that".

 

DemoRATS?

or demoCRAPS?

Anyway, if Saddam was a danger, he had to be removed.
Yeah, probably not invading Iraq would have allowed the UN to make Saddam resign...LOL

 

Bush had so much control of the world, he was fooling dems in the 90s!

Gotta love it, it makes the democrats look foolish to have the same intelligence, even BEFORE Bush was ever in office, support the same things, and now try to rewrite history.

 

Did Clinton started a war because of it? NO

Did Clinton wasted over $200,000,000,000 (so far) over an unnecessary war? NO

Did Clinton got thousands of American soldiers wounded or crippled for life? NO

Did Clinton got over 2000 American soldiers killed? NO

 

So what you're saying, gworld, is that Democrats wanted to, but didn't have the backbone or spit-ball supply?

 

No.

It doesn't need that much of backbone to attack a country that is defenseless.

Intelligent people try to solve the problems peacefully because they care about the life of soldiers and civilians who get killed in any war. On the other hand people with this kind of attitude have no problem with getting others killed.



By the way, since you are all for backbone and spit-ball, North Korea is openly admitting that they have nuclear weapon and they are treatning South Korea and Japan, what is happening with that?

 

Yes, that really must be it

http://www.cnn.com/US/9812/16/clinton.iraq.speech/

.

 

Did clinton get offered a Osama Bin Laden by sirea? YES

Did clinton turn that offer down? Yes

Did clinton sign a resolution calling for regime change in IRAQ? YES

Did clinton lob over 80 missles into iraq? YES

Did clinton finish the job? No

Clinton was a typical spineless twit.

 

It seems his actions worked since there was no WMD in Iraq and he didn't waste $200,000,000,000 or caused the death of over 2000 soldiers to make Iraq a recruiting ground for terrorists.

 

Yep, Bush must have gave him all that intel that the dems used in the 90s and in 2002/2003.

Spitballs?

 

Intelligence informations and facts change on daily basis. The important thing is how you process the intelligence and what actions you take.

To make this so simple that even you understand, let's imagine that it is 1980 and you are 10 years old. A friend of your family knows that it is your birthday (intelligence info., facts) and buys you a skateboard ( correct action).

In 2005, he remembers your birthday again, if he decides to buy you a toy gun that is a wrong decision since you are not 10 anymore but 35 years old. A more suitable course of action probably would be to buy you a bottle of scotch.

It seems Clinton was successful in his actions (destroying the WMD in Iraq with help of UN) while Bush was a failure by making Iraq a training ground for terrorists without finding any WMD which he stated as the cause for the war.

 

My wife is a high school English teacher. Yesterday, one of the students in her AP (advanced placement) class asked, "Was it Saddam or bin-laden that attacked us on 9-11?"

Can you say BRAINWASHING?

Nuff said!

 

No, it doesn't seem Clinton was successful at all. Well, unless you consider letting bin laden go three times a success, which you may very well.

Were the intel from 1980, you might have a point. 22 years is far different than four years, isn't it?

Dems had the same intel, before Bush was ever president, and the same dems issued the same statements and had access to the same materials, as evidenced by the video and my constant posting of those democrats own words.

For whatever reason, you simply can't handle that! And I find extreme humor in such