Misled into a mistake, a decade later

Jay, if I were you I would be crowing about how right I was at the time and how wrong the slimy, horrible corporate media I worked for really were.

(And then I would be dusting off my resume and telling my loved ones to get used to a diet of rice and beans, but I digress.)

Anyway, thank you, Jay, once again, for being a lonely voice of sanity at a time when almost nobody in the corporate media had the balls to say that the emperor had no clothes.

• Link
• Report this comment

Normal, I agree. If there is one of the things I vehemently disagree with Obama on is his failure to prosecute those criminals.

• Link
• Report this comment

May God have mercy on Americas collective soul.

We sinned most grievously as a nation.

• Link
• Report this comment

TO THE EFFING HAGUE!!

AS I mentioned yesterday, Panorama did an amazing documentary on the spies that lied us into the war (and how quickly leadership on both sides of the pond lapped up what they had to say, without bothering to verify / validate). http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b01rh8hd

Cheney isn’t the only one sticking to his “I’d do it again” stance – so is Blair.

May they both rot in hell for what they have done.

• Link
• Report this comment

I learned a lot about my country and my industry in that experience, and some of it wasn’t all that great.

Indeed. And so did we all.

• Link
• Report this comment

jay

You certainly were not alone, I was on the street corners in conservative melbourne protesting and getting cursed at, middle finger salutes…I never had any doubts that this was a idiotic mistake of major proportions. The reality of how my fellow americans could be so easily manipulated was the scariest impact, it was and still is a sad chapter in our history…

• Link
• Report this comment

off to get my namaste on before my blood pressure skyrockets with this topic.

• Link
• Report this comment

Pea, you presume that members of Congress were aware that there was deception. I am not convinced that they were but I am disappointed that they did not listen to the whispers (and some screams) to the contrary.

• Link
• Report this comment

The media, you know, the so-called “liberal media”, failed right along with the politicians. The media stood by and did no real reporting when Bush and Co were beating their war drums. They went along with everything the administration fed them, that meant they were consuming a lot of crap. CNN covered the initial Shock and Awe like the Super Bowl, ratings skyrocketed. Later on things like the removal of the statue were turned into made for cable news moments.

There were a few exceptions of course. Right here in fact. Jay Bookman was one of the few that weren’t cheer leading the war. Jay was right on the mark every step of the way.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA

March 20th, 2013
8:09 am
NPR had an interview this AM with Richard Perle. I had to turn it off, couldn’t stomach listening to him justify what they did. It was like listening to Cheney
.
.
.
.
Heard that and the end really ticked me off.

The interveiwer asked Pearle basically if after all we have learned
did he sill think it was worth it.

Pearle responded by slamming the question and then saying we “can’t”
go back look at what was done, because they believe they did the right thing.

I wanted to grab Pearle by the neck tie and shout
“WHO SAYS WE CAN’T you great big buffoon”.

We can, and we must review our past actions.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ten years ago, I had an inkling of what it must have been like to be in nazi germany when the gov’t when after those of jewish heritage. The tide of fascism was close to overwhelming, bush was the puppet and cheney was pulling the strings, it was obvious to anyone who had a lick of sense…

• Link
• Report this comment

“And THAT ^ sounds like you are trying to justify not prosecuting”

Nope. Just stating it for the record since people act like Bush was the only one.

• Link
• Report this comment

The architects are either obstinate, in denial or.. they really believe they were correct. Any explanation is cause for concern for those who see themselves as ‘public servants.’

Some thought Vietnam would make us suspicious of those who want to take us to war and would be a force for change in a compliant military leadership. Seems, given what we’ve been hearing about ground troops in Syria (peacekeeping’s such a nice word) or war with Iran (but… but… it’s not really a war, just a limited strike…) the suspicion isn’t quite at the level it should be at. But, just maybe, the military has been disabused of its ‘hey, not my job’ attitude of ‘we win wars. What happens after isn’t our problem.” If Iraq has taught any group the error of having an insulated view of what it will and won’t be called upon to do, it ought to be that.

Doggone/GA

Just turned NPR to catch the replay. You’re right – no time is Perle time.

• Link
• Report this comment

The “people” in the picture above shouldn’t be in jail, they shouldbe under it!

• Link
• Report this comment

The media, you know, the so-called “liberal media”, failed right along with the politicians. The media stood by and did no real reporting when Bush and Co were beating their war drums.

Stood by? Oh it was worse than that. Much, much worse.

The NYTimes had Judith Miller, she of the “I was proved f-cking right!” crowing, repeating outright lies. The WaPo had Richard Cohen making snide commentary about how only “Frenchmen” could possibly

And lest ANYONE forget the magnificence, the Mustache-of-Understanding, that heroic billionaire-by-marriage, Little Tommy Friedman, who like Cohen still has a high paying gig, who said that we needed to invade Iraq so that soldiers could go door to door and tell Iraqis to “suck on this.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZwFaSpca_3Q

At least Judith Miller is stuck bobbing for chum over at Newsmax these days, but the rest of those horrible men are doing just fine, today

• Link
• Report this comment

must be nice to be jay, an all-knowing person … he knows the motives and thoughts of other people…

• Link
• Report this comment

ok, I messed up the bit about Cohen. Here’s his money quote from 2003:

“The evidence Colin Powell presented to the United Nations — some of it circumstantial, some of it absolutely bone-chilling in its detail — had to prove to anyone that Iraq not only hasn’t accounted for its weapons of mass destruction but without a doubt still retains them. Only a fool — or possibly a Frenchman — could conclude otherwise.”

• Link
• Report this comment

If it was the wrong thing to do, why did the democrats in congress vote for it too? You fail to mention their hand in it Jay, nor Obama’s failur to pull the troops out and close Gitmo in the timeline that he promised.

Meanwhile, the most divisive ‘president’ in history is in Isreal and being protested by the Israeli citizens. obama is no friend of Israel and no friend of America.

Welcome to the Weenie Blog! Let the bedwetting begin!!

• Link
• Report this comment

must be nice to be jay, an all-knowing person

Jay is nice. He won’t tell you to go die in a fire.

But he should.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well, I reckon what amazes me is, nobody went to jail. Not even that Scooter Libby that was pardoned right after he was convicted of lying. 4000 of our kids are dead and many thousands more are crippled for life and nobody went to jail. The only thing we got out of the whole pack of lies was people being treated like criminals at airports and the guvmint being allowed to snoop on us. But let some kid get caught with a couple ounces of pot and to prison he will go.

And nobody went to jail. 4000 kids are dead because of a pack of lies and thousands more are growing up without a parent and the people that lied us into war are treated like heros by many.

And nobody went to jail. Amazing.

• Link
• Report this comment

Yep, vinny, just ignore the painful self-analysis, the recognition of failure of the liberal media, the beyond-bleedin’-obvious failure of Senators Kerry and Clinton, that everyone here already acknowledges.

Just post that ignorant crap @ 8.29. There’s a good lad, letting everyone know that you quite possibly possess a 3rd grader’s political acumen, at best.

• Link
• Report this comment

Vinny,

It has been told time and time again, but you won’t listen. G. W. Bush and company fed Congress false or misleading information to get them to go along. Proven and verified. President Bush and his cronies started a war that was not needed, killed many, many for our American youth and crippled times ten more. For nothing. Period. The end.

• Link
• Report this comment

Truly a sad anniversary to be remembered. Needless death, destruction, and suffering on such a large scale for no good reason.

• Link
• Report this comment

vinny

You seem to believe Democrats are supposed to do only the ‘right’ thing. I hope reality isn’t too crushing for you. The idea Democrats are human and all that.

“You fail to mention their hand in it Jay,”

You failed to read the section on ‘most Americans,’ eh?

” nor Obama’s failur to pull the troops out”

You really can’t be that ignorant, can you? We’ve had no troops there for over a year. Learn to do research, please…

” and close Gitmo in the timeline that he promised.”

And learn about the role of the Legislative branch in our federal government, okay?

• Link
• Report this comment

Redneck, I can forgive you for coming dangerously close to dropping character, here.

for what that’s worth, from a longtime admirer.

/drive-by

• Link
• Report this comment

Jerome Horwitz

March 20th, 2013
8:34 am

“War fever is easy to catch.”

Only by those “Armchair Warriors”, who have never seen a battle. Those who have are less willing to fall for that particular bug again.

• Link
• Report this comment

In retrospect, I would prefer we never went into Iraq. At the time- in the wake of the hanging chad debacle, there was so much partisan Bush hate coming from the left that it was very difficult to seperate any rational arguments against the war from the rabid Bush hate that was going to oppose anything he did.

I think the left could have made a more coherent argument against the war if they were not so angry and bitter at the time. I personally tuned them out largely because of the tone of their argument.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well said, Redneck doggone ya, well said, sir.

• Link
• Report this comment

I’ve often wondered if the investments of the pundit class, the likes of Hannity, Rush, Friedman et al are knowable. How much are these mouth pieces, on the right or left, or even the political class, invested in America’s war machine. To peel back the layer of conflicted interest, and expose whence they make their fortune, and why they argue as they do.

• Link
• Report this comment

I think the left could have made a more coherent argument against the war if they were not so angry and bitter at the time. I personally tuned them out largely because of the tone of their argument.

The reports were coming from the inspectors in Iraq that there were no weapons of mass destruction.

It’s no one’s fault but your own that you did not listen.

• Link
• Report this comment

Oh geez, now we’re going to equate the unjust war in Iraq with the legal right of women to control their own bodies?

• Link
• Report this comment

Mom 0f 3 – nice try on the deflection but it won’t work.

• Link
• Report this comment

REcon

Did you completely miss the late 60’s and early 70’s?

Who do you think finally forced an end to the Vietnam debacle?

Didn’t see any righties marching to end the war….getting shot…arrested…

Private Twinkie dismissed.

• Link
• Report this comment

The zombie lies continue…

Where’s the lie Jay?

• Link
• Report this comment

“The reports were coming from the inspectors in Iraq that there were no weapons of mass destruction.”

That’s a debatable point. You can look at a little more balanced argument here -
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Did_George_Bush_lie_about_the_WMDs_in_Iraq

• Link
• Report this comment

“[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.” — From a letter signed by Joe Lieberman, Dianne Feinstein, Barbara A. Milulski, Tom Daschle, & John Kerry among others on October 9, 1998

“This December will mark three years since United Nations inspectors last visited Iraq. There is no doubt that since that time, 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 refine 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.” — From a December 6, 2001 letter signed by Bob Graham, Joe Lieberman, Harold Ford, & Tom Lantos among others

“Whereas Iraq has consistently breached its cease-fire agreement between Iraq and the United States, entered into on March 3, 1991, by failing to dismantle its weapons of mass destruction program, and refusing to permit monitoring and verification by United Nations inspections; Whereas Iraq has developed weapons of mass destruction, including chemical and biological capabilities, and has made positive progress toward developing nuclear weapons capabilities” — From a joint resolution submitted by Tom Harkin and Arlen Specter on July 18, 2002

“Saddam’s goal … is to achieve the lifting of U.N. sanctions while retaining and enhancing Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction programs. We cannot, we must not and we will not let him succeed.” — Madeline Albright, 1998

“(Saddam) will rebuild his arsenal of weapons of mass destruction and some day, some way, I am certain he will use that arsenal again, as he has 10 times since 1983″ — National Security Adviser Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998

“Iraq made commitments after the Gulf War to completely dismantle all weapons of mass destruction, and unfortunately, Iraq has not lived up to its agreement.” — Barbara Boxer, November 8, 2002

“The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained 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 capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability.” — Robert Byrd, October 2002

“There’s no question that Saddam Hussein is a threat… Yes, he has chemical and biological weapons. He’s had those for a long time. But the United States right now is on a very much different defensive posture than we were before September 11th of 2001… He is, as far as we know, actively pursuing nuclear capabilities, though he doesn’t have nuclear warheads yet. If he were to acquire nuclear weapons, I think our friends in the region would face greatly increased risks as would we.” — Wesley Clark on September 26, 2002

“What is at stake is how to answer the potential threat Iraq represents with the risk of proliferation of WMD. Baghdad’s regime did use such weapons in the past. Today, a number of evidences may lead to think that, over the past four years, in the absence of international inspectors, this country has continued armament programs.” — Jacques Chirac, October 16, 2002

“The community of nations may see more and more of the very kind of threat Iraq poses now: a rogue state with weapons of mass destruction, ready to use them or provide them to terrorists. If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow.” — Bill Clinton in 1998

“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, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. 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. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security.” — Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

“I am absolutely convinced that there are weapons…I saw evidence back in 1998 when we would see the inspectors being barred from gaining entry into a warehouse for three hours with trucks rolling up and then moving those trucks out.” — Clinton’s Secretary of Defense William Cohen in April of 2003

“Iraq is not the only nation in the world to possess weapons of mass destruction, but it is the only nation with a leader who has used them against his own people.” — Tom Daschle in 1998

“Saddam Hussein’s regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“The debate over Iraq is not about politics. It is about national security. It should be clear that our national security requires Congress to send a clear message to Iraq and the world: America is united in its determination to eliminate forever the threat of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction.” — John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

“I share the administration’s goals in dealing with Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction.” — Dick Gephardt in September of 2002

“Iraq does pose a serious threat to the stability of the Persian Gulf and we should organize an international coalition to eliminate his access to weapons of mass destruction. Iraq’s search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to completely deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power.” — Al Gore, 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.” — Bob Graham, December 2002

“Saddam Hussein is not the only deranged dictator who is willing to deprive his people in order to acquire weapons of mass destruction.” — Jim Jeffords, October 8, 2002

“We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction.” — Ted Kennedy, September 27, 2002

“There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein’s regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed.” — Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 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.” — John F. Kerry, Oct 2002

“The threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but as I said, it is not new. It has been with us since the end of that war, and particularly in the last 4 years we know after Operation Desert Fox failed to force him to reaccept them, that he has continued to build those weapons. He has had a free hand for 4 years to reconstitute these weapons, allowing the world, during the interval, to lose the focus we had on weapons of mass destruction and the issue of proliferation.” — John Kerry, October 9, 2002

“(W)e need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime. We all know the litany of his offenses. 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. That is why the world, through the United Nations Security Council, has spoken with one voice, demanding that Iraq disclose its weapons programs and disarm. So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real, but it is not new. It has been with us since the end of the Persian Gulf War.” — John Kerry, Jan 23, 2003

“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 mandates of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them.” — Carl Levin, Sept 19, 2002

“Every day Saddam remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States.” — Joe Lieberman, August, 2002

“Over the years, Iraq has worked to develop nuclear, chemical and biological weapons. During 1991 – 1994, despite Iraq’s denials, U.N. inspectors discovered and dismantled a large network of nuclear facilities that Iraq was using to develop nuclear weapons. Various reports indicate that Iraq is still actively pursuing nuclear weapons capability. There is no reason to think otherwise. Beyond nuclear weapons, Iraq has actively pursued biological and chemical weapons.U.N. inspectors have said that Iraq’s claims about biological weapons is neither credible nor verifiable. In 1986, Iraq used chemical weapons against Iran, and later, against its own Kurdish population. While weapons inspections have been successful in the past, there have been no inspections since the end of 1998. There can be no doubt that Iraq has continued to pursue its goal of obtaining weapons of mass destruction.” — Patty Murray, October 9, 2002

“As a member of the House Intelligence Committee, I am keenly aware that the proliferation of chemical and biological weapons is an issue of grave importance to all nations. 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.” — Nancy Pelosi, December 16, 1998

“Even today, Iraq is not nearly disarmed. Based on highly credible intelligence, UNSCOM [the U.N. weapons inspectors] suspects that Iraq still has biological agents like anthrax, botulinum toxin, and clostridium perfringens in sufficient quantity to fill several dozen bombs and ballistic missile warheads, as well as the means to continue manufacturing these deadly agents. Iraq probably retains several tons of the highly toxic VX substance, as well as sarin nerve gas and mustard gas. This agent is stored in artillery shells, bombs, and ballistic missile warheads. And Iraq retains significant dual-use industrial infrastructure that can be used to rapidly reconstitute large-scale chemical weapons production.” — Ex-Un Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter in 1998

“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. And that may happen sooner if he can obtain access to enriched uranium from foreign sources — something that is not that difficult in the current world. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Saddam�s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America, now. Saddam has used chemical weapons before, both against Iraq�s enemies and against his own people. He is working to develop delivery systems like missiles and unmanned aerial vehicles that could bring these deadly weapons against U.S. forces and U.S. facilities in the Middle East.” — John Rockefeller, Oct 10, 2002

“Whether one agrees or disagrees with the Administration�s policy towards Iraq, I don�t think there can be any question about Saddam�s conduct. 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. He lies and cheats; he snubs the mandate and authority of international weapons inspectors; and he games the system to keep buying time against enforcement of the just and legitimate demands of the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States and our allies. Those are simply the facts.” — Henry Waxman, Oct 10, 2002

• Link
• Report this comment

“Criminalizing politics is a very dangerous step.”

The republicans don’t seem to have a problem with it; trying for years to find something that would stick, then impeaching Clinton. Would do it to Obama too if they could find anytghing to stick.

• Link
• Report this comment

Recon

“Where’s the lie”

As was posted earlier, you asserted “a cowardly attack on American soil by radical Islamic terrorists whom this dictator supported that killed over 3000 innocent people.””

Where’s the truth?

Got a source? Or an explanation of the reasoning that led you to make the statement?

• Link
• Report this comment

… most Democrats and Republicans alike believed possessed WMD’s.

Most Democrats?

While most Democrats in the Senate voted in favor of the Iraq resolution (29 for, 21 against), the House was overwhelmingly against (82 for, 126 against).

Totals:
111 for
147 against

Clear evidence that “most Democrats” were not in favor of invading Iraq.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, two things:

1) I looked it up, it wasn’t a “truth commission” Cal Thomas wanted, but rather a… well, let’s let Cal tell the tale:

“cultural war crimes tribunal” be convened, at which people from academia, the media, government and the clergy who were wrong in their assessment of communism would be forced to confront their mistakes. While not wishing to deprive anyone of his or her right to be wrong, it wouldn’t hurt for these people to be held accountable.

http://townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/2003/04/15/false_media_prophets

2) Please, for the love of God, have your IT guys install a character limiter so that spammy copy/pasted crap like ZoSo’s doesn’t get dumped in here. If you can’t make your OWN point in (say) 600 words or less, go get your own damn blog.

/drive-by, probably done with this for awhile…

• Link
• Report this comment

That’s a debatable point.

Nope.

Reports from the inspectors were coming out before Bush pulled them out.

Again, you didn’t believe them?

That’s on you.

• Link
• Report this comment

Read ZoSo’s 8:50 post very carefully before you get out the rope and throw it over a tree limb. Bush might have a lot of liberal company on that tree.

• Link
• Report this comment

If al gore would have rightfully become president it is entirely possibble that 9/11 might not have happened, but what we definitely know that he would not have invaded iraq.
What a lousy path our country took when bush was installed. It’s like we were cursed both politically, and in the end economically. Eight years that changed america for the worst…

• Link
• Report this comment

America continues to crumble while Republicans insist on spending cuts to offset rebuilding the country. Several natural disasters have struck the nation this year. Wildfires have savaged Texas, an earthquake rocked the East, hurricanes have slammed the southern and eastern coastlines, and tornadoes have ripped through the South. Yet, Republicans have no sympathy whatsoever for those affected by these disasters. They simply refuse to approve the funding necessary to rebuild America unless spending cuts are made to offset it. But apparently, they were perfectly willing to approve $50 billion of funding to rebuild Iraq, and they didn’t call for a single dollar in cuts to offset it.

According to FEMA, disasters have caused approximately $36 billion in damages across the country, and many Republicans have held their own states hostage in an effort to gut programs they hate such as Social Security, Medicare, and education in exchange for approving the funding these states need to rebuild. Eric Cantor told the residents of his own disaster afflicted district that aid would only arrive if spending cuts were made. Senators John Cornyn and Richard Burr Have joined Cantor.

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2011/09/13/the-gop-cares-more-about-rebuilding-iraq-than-rebuilding-america/

• Link
• Report this comment

Recon

Are you thinking maybe you had it wrong about that link between Saddam and the 9-11 attackers?

Experiencing a little dissonance, thinking that puts you in the same category as Democrats who voted to go to war in Iraq based upon a false understanding?

• Link
• Report this comment

Here’s were Republicans get just down right creepy.

Iraq war, 4,000 dead soldiers, thousands more injured, trillion dollars wasted.

BENGHAZI!, 4 American deaths, 3 injured.

Now, which one of those events did Republicans go completely ballistic over?

• Link
• Report this comment

For what it’s worth, I didn’t agree with invading Iraq either.

• Link
• Report this comment

dannyx

Bullseye!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

DannyX

Yep, that’s pretty amazing. One guest on Fox who pointed out something similar managed to set the record for ’shortest guest appearance in the history of Fox.”

• Link
• Report this comment

What? No Rand Paul blog? But there’s so much left unsaid!

Well, what do ya know, right after a wave of bombings kill 65 people in Baghdad marking the ten year anniversity of the invasion, Jay pens a blog about how all that ills Iraq is Bush’s fault. Coincidence? I think not.

Ever since the great and exalted Preezy got his Nobel, Iraq seriously started to turn into sh*t. Why? Because O’bozo repeatedly told the world the US would be withdrawing TOTALLY (in contrast to the Bush policy) thereby creating a vacuum quickly filled by Iran.

Even the Dem propaganda arm, AP, can’t avoid the truth any longer:

“…its…government is arguably closer to Tehran than to Washington.”

O’bozo and him amen chorus in the press don’t want to be blamed for losing Iraq to terrorist mullahs, so he and they do what they do best: blame someone else. And Bush is the guy.

• Link
• Report this comment

It’s amazing how the left-wing brain selectively blocks out facts that conflicts with the propaganda they soak up from their spin masters. It was well known that Saddam Hussein sat on top of a ton of oil money a good bit of which he used to finance various Islamic terrorist organizations. He paid money to the families of suicide bombers and did indeed maintain a relationship with A.Q. This country and the rest of the world is far better off without Saddam Hussein and if he was left in power we would have had to of dealt with him at some point.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay “And that is simply wrong as well, a blatant rewriting of history. There was almost no criticism of Bush post-9/11″

You and I remember this time much differently. There was a very vocal minority who opposed the war in the strongest terms. So strong that it had a very partisan appearance.

• Link
• Report this comment

Sen. Bob Graham, at the time the chairman of the Senate Intelligence Committee, voted AGAINST the war resolution because he said the intel just was not there. That’s one reason why I have never given Hillary, another member of that committee, any slack on her vote in support. She had every opportunity to know better, and chose otherwise.

I can appreciate that and would agree. Unfortunately not everyone was as well informed as those two and certainly the American public was not.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay “For the record, Clinton at the time was warning Saddam that he might launch air strikes against perceived WMD sites. He was not suggesting an invasion and occupation, which is a very different matter.

Agreed. I wasn’t trying to suggest Clinton was making the case for war. I was just saying we can’t pretend that Bush just made this whole WMD thing up out of thin air in order to invade Iraq. That seems to be the revisionist history that is going around.

• Link
• Report this comment

“and certainly the American public was not”

Not all of us were “not well informed”

• Link
• Report this comment

So vinny’s concerned about our gulag in Guantanamo? Not so much, just wants to do him some hating on Obama.

• Link
• Report this comment

If al gore would have rightfully become president it is entirely possibble that 9/11 might not have happened, but what we definitely know that he would not have invaded iraq.

LOL!!!

• Link
• Report this comment

vinny

” What part of “in the timeline that he promised” do you not understand. Learn to read, nimrod.”

And why did he not close Gitmo ‘in the timeline that he promised.” vinny? Enlighten us, please.

• Link
• Report this comment

sink

Amazing conclusion there fella….after bush let loose the dogs of war the writing was on the wall, he handed over iraq to iran on a silver platter. The shiites far outnumber the sunni’s and they hated saddam, didn’t take long for them to align with iran which is shiite.
Bush and co. were truly incompetent concerning this important fact concerning war and the consequences…

• Link
• Report this comment

GT: “This country has lost its guts; we have become a nation of fear.”

And whiners, brother!

DannyX: Good point.

F Sinkwich: I do not remember internal bombings by the natives when Saddam was in power. Your point?

• Link
• Report this comment

Is that a teleprompter in the picture? You betcha.

The media was quiet because the cons labeled anyone who disagreed “unAmerican” or “unpatriotic”.

And you saw plenty of that on Lukovich’s blog.

” He paid money to the families of suicide bombers and did indeed maintain a relationship with A.Q. ”

This has already been disproven. But keep lying to yourself if it gets rid of the guilt.

• Link
• Report this comment

The world is not “better off” without Saddam in any way, shape, or form, nor is Iraq.

• Link
• Report this comment

godless

Close to 5000 soldiers dead and over 30,000 severely wounded are not lol…

• Link
• Report this comment

“I’m just saying it wasn’t the clear cut “Bush Lied” scenario that people want to believe. A more accurate statement might be that he looked at the intelligence reports that supported his opinion and ignored those that didn’t”

And you truly cannot see the contradiction in what you just posted? Really and truly?

• Link
• Report this comment

The overwhelming majority of Americans hear only what information the Government wants you to know.

I believe President Bush truly believed Iraq had WMDs because his circle of advisors led by Cheney fed him that information. They had their own agenda and manipulated President Bush, Congress, and the American public. They figured it would be quick and easy plus their friends and ultimately they would make money. They miscalculated on the quick and easy part.

So what do we have after our efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan?

More enemies in the Middle East.

• Link
• Report this comment

“That was YOUR perception that you imposed on it and that prevented you from looking at what they saying objectively.”

Maybe – but if you wanted to persuade me, you would have been better off by telling me that there were conflicting intelligence reports instead of screaming “Bush is a liar”.

If you want to win public support, it is incumbent on you to make the argument in a rational way, not on the public to pick the rational points out of a screeching rant.

• Link
• Report this comment

It’s too easy for all of us to play Monday quarterback on a situation like this. Whether you for or against the invasion at the time it occurred 10 years ago, the majority of Americans (both publicly and represented by the public in Congress) approved of this measure. We as a people need to not forgot this mistake, and that history not repeat itself.

• Link
• Report this comment

Shorter Recon: I can’t hear you. LALALALALALALALALALALALALAL

• Link
• Report this comment

I guess Jay and his ilk still longs for the days of Saddam being in power.

• Link
• Report this comment

Ten years on and I don’t even know where to begin anymore.

I do know that I need to be very careful with my words on this topic, if I want to remain a contributing member to this forum!

Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, of course, and not just because of the First Amendment. But the filthy and absurd lies STILL being promulgated by Recon and others are completely astounding.

So, I’m going to break my thoughts on this one down into smaller pieces.

First piece:

That photo of those five walking together repulses me. That it does not have the same effect on pretty much everyone amazes me.

• Link
• Report this comment

“you would have been better off by telling me that there were conflicting intelligence reports instead of screaming “Bush is a liar”. ”

Except there weren’t conflicting reports. At the time, the most reliable, up to date reports were from the inspectors on the ground in Iraq who found…and SAID they found…NOTHING. The only “conflict” has already shown up here: that there were reports IN THE PAST the he had WMD. Those reports were superseded by the inspectors. And the inspectors were not only ignored, they were ordered to get out as we were about to attack.

• Link
• Report this comment

Hind sight is always 20/20. Bush did what he thought had to be done, and at the time the majority of Americans supported it. Then the media started with their propaganda, constantly telling Americans the ‘Bush lied, Americans died’ garbage. The left make him out to be a crazed lunatic with a happy trigger finger. George Bush was a good man, too bad you are blinded by your ideology. At least George Bush stood up to tyranny as opposed to what we have in Washington now.

And how is that Benghazi investigation going? Been 6 months and haven’t heard a peep from our pathetic president or his media lap dogs.

• Link
• Report this comment

recon

I believe your only correct talking point is that saddam pledged 10k to any palestinian family whose son became a suicide bomber against israel. Also, he plotted to assassinate george h.w. bush when he visited kuwait. Both of those incidents even put together don’t amount to going to war, plain and simple…

• Link
• Report this comment

“Evidently it was reported in such a partisan fashion, that ignoring or dismissing it is justified’

Huh?

I never understood the justifications proposed by the Bush administration. The inspectors on the ground said there were NO WMDs.

When the adminstration suggested they had indisputable evidence, including locations of the WMDs, I wondered why they didn’t just take them out – we were enforcing the No Fly zone at the time, as I recall.

It all seemed very suspicious. But any attempt to question was shouted down as “unpatriotic.” I think 9/11 screwed up a lot of people in their minds…

• Link
• Report this comment

“There’s no way of knowing.”

Stick to that line of thinking Jay….

• Link
• Report this comment

Recon 0311 2533
March 20th, 2013
9:24 am

Then please, post some links to back up what you claim.

• Link
• Report this comment

I laughed at the notion that Al Gore was cheated out of the election and that he would have prevented 9/11. Maybe we would not have gone to Iraq in 2003, but we would have sooner or later.

• Link
• Report this comment

Saying the world is flat, then responding by saying ‘it is well documented by those who know that the world really, really is flat’ just doesn’t cut it.

It is actually disc shaped and being carried throughout the solar system by a giant space turtle.

http://tinyurl.com/bmnqhjh

Betcha didn’t know that, did ya?

• Link
• Report this comment

“Congress authorized the war yet jay still implies it was all President Bush and VP Cheney”

and it was. if your Mother tells you YOU can choose to jump off a cliff or not, it is NOT her responsiblity if you decide to jump. Congress authorized Bush to MAKE THE CHOICE. He chose wrong, and that choice is his responsibility and his alone.

• Link
• Report this comment

“I guess Jay and his ilk still longs for the days of Saddam being in power.”

You guess strangely.

• Link
• Report this comment

But let’s not act as if Saddam Hussein was some saint either. Here is a little fact sheet about his life and his actions against his own people who dared to question him. He was a monster.

“Saddam is a monster” is not the reason given for the invasion of Iraq.

The smoking gun is the mushroom cloud.

• Link
• Report this comment

California Nonpartisan Districting Ousts Life Incumbents

“You’ve had voters shoehorned into districts for the sake of maintaining incumbency and we aren’t doing that in California anymore,” said Kim Alexander, founder and president of California Voter Foundation. “It was a big shakeout. That’s probably what would happen everywhere if you had fair redistricting.”

Could these independent commissions be the end of gerrymandering?

This is the original article of which the preceeding post was a part.

• Link
• Report this comment

Scratch It

March 20th, 2013
9:29 am
What jay fails to mention is that the world saw the same intelligence the US did
.
.
.
.
Ah, nope.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Possibly the only decent lesson to learn from California”

You don’t like right turn on red?

• Link
• Report this comment

godless

Over 60k legitimate african american voters were scrubbed from election rolls in fl. by katherin harris, think they were going to vote for bush? That’s why jeb, who is complicit in this blatant act of cheating should never be president, first and foremost..

• Link
• Report this comment

“Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy.”

Secret Downing Street memo leaked and published in the Sunday Times. Mostly ignored in the American media.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay @8:45

Cal Thomas did suggest a “Truth Commission” some years later–with the full agreement of the more liberal Bob Beckel, FWIW.

http://www.calthomas.com/index.php?news=2603

• Link
• Report this comment

Danny X is right, creepy logic has gotten us where we are today. I think Republicans watch too many movies and mix reality and fiction up. There is no poetic license given in governing peoples lives, nothing romantic about being shot, or anything about guns, that make midgets feel like giants, idiots feel like Einstein.

• Link
• Report this comment

Soothie likes me linky eh?

• Link
• Report this comment

The speculation about why Gore lost and what might have and might not have happened if he had won is at best laughable….those kinds of predictions only serve those that make them

• Link
• Report this comment

” Hussein was an Arab and within that culture”

So, Recon’s got nothin’.

• Link
• Report this comment

recon

The palestinians are not al queda, saddam was just trying to be a thorn in israel side because they took out his fledgling nuclear reactor in the 80’s. I still maintain along with many that the invasion of iraq was illegal and ultimately destablized the region even more than it was to begin with…

• Link
• Report this comment

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10022537300

• Link
• Report this comment

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/03/charts-cost-iraq-war

• Link
• Report this comment

If there really was justice in this country, that group of maniacs would be sitting in jail.

Word.

What’s so sad though, from reading some responses, is that there are really people in the U.S. who feel differently.

I think these are the same people who, given the chance, would always take the blue pill, (The blue pill would allow him to remain in the fabricated reality of the Matrix. The red pill would lead to his escape from the Matrix and into the “real world”), these people ENJOY living in their bubbles and would hate for reality to intrude.

• Link
• Report this comment

Granny G,

I forgot about him. He sure was correct.

• Link
• Report this comment

erwin

You can’t change history but you can speculate…there were warnings all over the place the summer preceding 9/11 about hijackings. Stop the hijackings and there would be no 9/11, you didn’t need to know about the plot. Richard Clarke has already been on record that the bush admin did not take bin laden seriously, clinton and gore did, so, gore might have been more vigilant about the warnings that summer – just a theory but likely…

• Link
• Report this comment

“We the public didn’t have the facts to make an informed decision ”

I did. Why didn’t you?

• Link
• Report this comment

Did anyone see Luckovich? Hilarious!

• Link
• Report this comment

Well after reading some of the comments it my be possible that hindsight is not 20/20

• Link
• Report this comment

And from the useless opinions file, I very much disagree with Jay when he writes: I do not believe that prosecution would have been appropriate….

My goodness, this level of deadly duplicity and criminal malfeasance does not rise to the level of “high crimes and misdemeanors”? I believe that it clearly did.

…or possible.

Only because of a dearth of moral courage in Washington DC by men and women who put their political futures before the good of the republic.

Criminalizing politics is a very dangerous step.

Agreed, but these were – and still are – very dangerous liars intent on and successful in subjugating the law of the land to their own deviant purposes.

The truth is that by the time the war began, a strong if not overwhelming majority of Americans supported it. This is a stain on our nation, not just on those individuals who led it at the time.

Immaterial. From what I have read of it, the US Constitution does not read, “First take a poll and see if the populace agrees that these are high crimes and misdemeanors.”

The five people in that photo should have be tried for violations of American and international law. And Mssrs. Bush and Cheney should never have served out their terms…

• Link
• Report this comment

Just more proof you cannot trust the GOP. The war was only going to cost 50 billion, more like 2 trillion before it is all said and done.
How about Reagan (Bill Casey) negotiating with Iran to hold the hostages until after the election. Isn’t that treason?

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay, I’m not so sure about your comment that leaders knew there were no WMD, etc before the invasion. If that was so, either Powell lied or they used him like Obama did Rice.

Despite all the flaws of W and Cheney, when it comes to National Defense I would rather have them than Obama and his team. I’ve not felt comfortable with anything since Obama took office. Plus, he lies consciously all the time. We call him on it, you guys let him get away with it.

• Link
• Report this comment

BTW – I lost count of the all the Monday Morning Quarterbacks here today.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA

and it was. if your Mother tells you YOU can choose to jump off a cliff or not, it is NOT her responsiblity if you decide to jump. Congress authorized Bush to MAKE THE CHOICE. He chose wrong, and that choice is his responsibility and his alone.

Its your opinion he chose wrong. Most people realize it was a hard decision but was the right one. The world is a better place without Saddam Hussein. But still as libs love to blame its just as much every dem who voted for it to own up to it to.

• Link
• Report this comment

The media is finally spilling the beans on Bush and his henchman, and now the cons are scurrying around to defend him like roaches when the light is turned on.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Aside from Obama taking over 1/3 of the economy while he was President,”

Didn’t know there was a hyperbole contest this morning but we do know who is currently in the lead………..

• Link
• Report this comment

Are we back to incantations? Keep repeating the same old lies again again again and again. Then again with a new website. Again with another progressive liberal media source? After 30 years the intelligence can be released if the ongoing president will allow it. But that will just start another incantation by the liberals. But it is so much fun watching them spew out all their knowledge and intelligence about such an event and how skilled they are in plugging in the holes with disinformation and misdirection. That college education in cutting and pasting is paying off.

• Link
• Report this comment

Well the lib’s have been so politically driven to rewrite history that with the exception of Mick they probably actually believe the history rewrite. I could appeal to their common sense and point out how Saddam once invaded Kuwait and how we had to push him out and that we became his sworn enemy or the reports of his plan to kill Bush Sr. or his financing of suicide bombers but then lefties lack common sense so I may as well leave them to their delusion that Saddam Hussein was really a peach of a guy and that GWB made up a story about WMD’s only to deprive him of his justly deserved dictatorship.

• Link
• Report this comment

“BTW – I lost count of the all the Monday Morning Quarterbacks here today”

Yeah, JReb, they had “ESP”N

• Link
• Report this comment

If it were up to me, we’d round up the whole bunch, from Bush to Cheney to Rumsfeld to Wolfowitz and on down the line, and ship them all off to the Hague for war crimes trials.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Its your opinion he chose wrong. ”

no, it’s not

he chose wrongly because:
1) he chose not to pursue intel that he didn’t want to hear (hellooooo yellowcake!)
2) he chose to lie about why he was invading the country (WMD! Saddam! Freeance!)
3) he then chose to do it on the cheap, without seeking assistance from our allies (that should have told you about how tenuous his “proof” was)

• Link
• Report this comment

Normal, thanks!

Apparently Mr. Luckovich agrees with me and the American Bar Association about the most incompetent vice president in 150 years!

• Link
• Report this comment

alittlecommonsense: “But to pretend it was just Bush lying because he wanted Iraq’s oil, or had a personal grudge against Saddam, etc., is a hollow argument.”

Have you not been following the discussion? The argument here is more that it was a grand, epochal strategic “leap” that this was about, one aiming for a bold “reset” of geopolitical affairs and a reassertion of US imperial dominance. Obviously the oil was important here, too, and comes under the aforementioned, but that is not what any serious observer is claiming was the primary or essential motivation.

• Link
• Report this comment

“It’s your opinion he chose wrong.”

Nope, it’s a fact

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA:

Nope, it’s a fact

Nope, it’s not. Its your opinion. Can you prove its a fact?

• Link
• Report this comment

“Nope, it’s not. Its your opinion. Can you prove its a fact?”

“Misled into a mistake, a decade later”

• Link
• Report this comment

For all those who are defending Bush & Cheney, those mighty weekend warriors, do you remember General Franks first words when he was fighting in Afghanistan and was told to prepare for the invasion of Iraq; and for these same nimrods defending the WMD issue, yes he had them at one time and we knew it because Reagan, Cheney, and Rumsfield gave them to him and gave him the coordinates to drop them on the Iranians. Geez, learn some history!

• Link
• Report this comment

“they had “ESP”N”

Good one, Betty!

• Link
• Report this comment

I clearly remember even my more moderate friends telling me I was unpatriotic to not support this war, but at a gut level I knew it was completely wrong. It was so frustrating to voice any opinions against the war because everyone was so angry about 911. But why did we equate Iraq with 911? I blame the idiot media for caving to the conservatives.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA

“Nope, it’s not. Its your opinion. Can you prove its a fact?”

“Misled into a mistake, a decade later”

Lead to a stable democracy, a decade later….

Scratch that. When Bush left office….

• Link
• Report this comment

Ahhh more incantation from different sources:

What a courageous partner in our glorious War on Brains.

http://www.arras.net/circulars/archives/tn_tony_bum_snort.jpg

ttp://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/mar/19/baghdad-bombings-anniversary-invasion

Wait there will be more to come. They will have a recess and trade notes and then websites.

• Link
• Report this comment

Interesting tidbit from Parade Magazine’s ten worst dictators for 2003. Who’s above Hussain at 3rd?
In February of 2003, Parade Magazine (Boston Globe) published the following list of the “Worst Dictators on the Planet.”

1. Kim Jong-il (North Korea)
2. King Fahd and Prince Abdullah (Saudi Arabia)
3. Saddam Hussein (Iraq)
4. Charles Taylor (Liberia)
5. Than Shwe (former Burma, now Myanmar)
6. Teodoro Obiang Nguema (Equatorial Guinea)
7. Saparmurat Niyazov (Turkmenistan)
8. Muammar Gaddafi (Libya)
9. Fidel Castro (Cuba)
10. Alexander Lukashenko (Belarus)

• Link
• Report this comment

JamVet

March 20th, 2013
10:16 am
You do know the viet nam war was started by Kennedy and continued by Johnson. The conservatives were wrong because they followed their leader and that is something we can not do today.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Nope, it’s not. Its your opinion. Can you prove its a fact?”

I’m sorry … where EXACTLY were those WMDs found???

• Link
• Report this comment

Absolutely Nothing, say it again.

• Link
• Report this comment

Lead to a stable democracy, a decade later….

Not surprising – more idiotic lies to justify all of the previous ones that the guppies swallowed, hook, line and sinker…

http://nation.foxnews.com/iraq/2012/01/15/former-iraqi-pmiraq-neither-stable-nor-democratic

• Link
• Report this comment

‘a stable democracy’?

Why argue with someone who is that out of touch with reality…

• Link
• Report this comment

“Absolutely Nothing, say it again”

..and now I always picture jackie Chan…

• Link
• Report this comment

Willie,

I will agree that LBJ made the Viet Nam war into what it was, but if JFK had remained alive so would have 58,000 plus Americans. He never would have gone past advisor stage. JFK had been to war, was a bonafide hero. He KNEW what war was like and he would have avoided it if at all possible.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Most casualties in Afghanistan happened on his watch because of his inexperience and not being engaged”

You say such silly things. BTW, our president is married.

• Link
• Report this comment

“I’m sorry … where EXACTLY were those WMDs found???”

Well there were the residents of a Kurd village that was completely eliminated with chemical weapons. Oh I know we must redefine WMD now to mean biological/nuclear right. Keep up your incantations they has to be some uninformed person who will believe you.

• Link
• Report this comment

and you know this because you’ve been in the sit room everyday.

He knows this because unlike the Manly Man-Ape from Texas (ok, New Haven, pretty close though), Obama never walks around like he just got done ridin’ a horsie.

• Link
• Report this comment

“but if JFK had remained alive so would have 58,000 plus Americans.”

Now that is another myth the liberals love to cling to. If he only lived. Yep and if Lincoln had lived the South would not had to live through reconstruction and redistribution.

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK … no longer a rainy Friday, but still mildly cranky

“Most casualties in Afghanistan happened on his watch because of his inexperience and not being engaged.”

yes. and you know this because you’ve been in the sit room everyday.

no. I know this because there are stats to back it up. Silly lib.

• Link
• Report this comment

Scratch It

March 20th, 2013
10:20 am
Divert much?

That is the most insane thing I have ever read.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Well there were the residents of a Kurd village that was completely eliminated with chemical weapons”

And thart was 10 YEARS before we invaded. If that was the justification, it sort of didn’t get mentioned…now did it?

• Link
• Report this comment

“I rephrased my earlier post. It was stable when President Bush left office”

Tens of thousands of foreign troops make a country “stable?” You have a strange definition of the word…

• Link
• Report this comment

williebkind

March 20th, 2013
10:26 am

Willie,

You do know, don’t you, that we gave Saddam those chemical weapons?

• Link
• Report this comment

Saddam Hussein had exiled to Egypt after trying to overthrow the Iraq government in the 1970s. He quickly befriended CIA operatives who supported and financed his overthrow of the Iraq government because they leaned too far to the Soviet Union. His dictatorship was totally supported by the U.S. and the West. After the fall of the Soviet Union, he became expendable (as well as other U.S. dictators – see Panama for further reading). However, he was still OUR dictator until he went to war with Kuwait. Now he was a dictator out of control and no longer serving our interest. Iraq’s many ethnic factions make democracy a fantasy. But even though in the U.S., the right wing feels that our government should be out of our lives and small, there is never a doubt that they love to drop bombs on the other guys. No matter the excuse.

• Link
• Report this comment

williebkind

March 20th, 2013
10:28 am

Sorry Willie, You are just another right wing idiot, with that statement. You are on your own from now on. What a joke.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Of course in the mind of a liberal we only have to be nice to them and they’ll like us”

And that’s why Bush also invaded North Korea, right? I mean, after all, they have a brutal dictatorship AND nuclear WMDs. So we MUST have invaded them.

funny, that invasion was NEVER reported anywhere. Talk about keeping a secret!

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay

March 20th, 2013
9:33 am

“The inspectors were perilously close to proving that no WMD existed, which is why Bush ordered them out of the country so the war could proceed. That is documented history.”

I seemed to have never read this version of history. Must be that secret bed wetting history boo,

“The war was never about WMD; WMD was the excuse used to justify an invasion of an oil-rich country at the heart of the Islamic world that had nothing whatsoever to do with 9/11. That invasion was intended to send a message to Muslims everywhere, and as a means of establishing permanent US bases in Iraq to be used to dominate that region militarily and intimidate neighboring Iran into doing what we said.”

If I take your word for these reasons then they still are good reasons to go to war. It is called in the strategic and economic interest of the nation.

The left has never seemed to realize that the economy of this nation (you know the means to which people become wealthy so that the government can confiscate their money to pay for these redistribution schemes that the left loves) is run on OIL. It is in the strategic and economic interest that the right people in the middle east control the oil and that the oil is shipped to this country with the least amount of expense.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay: “JFK was a Cold War advocate who had shown little willingness to challenge accepted wisdom on that topic. I think that he too would have had a very hard time walking back and letting South Vietnam “go Commie” on his watch.”

You better believe it.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay
March 20th, 2013
8:31 am

“sfd, I had never been a fan of Cohen, but I too remember that one very well.

Overall, the refusal of major media outlets to look at things with even a modicum of skepticism was startling to me.”
————————–

Would you say your main media outlet, The AJC, has done an adequate job of being skeptical in regards to the Obama administrations continuation and expansion of the Drone program started by Bush abroad?

Easy to throw stones at others

• Link
• Report this comment

It is in the strategic and economic interest that the right people in the middle east control the oil and that the oil is shipped to this country with the least amount of expense.

Our self interest in the natural resources of another country justifies killing?

Wow!

• Link
• Report this comment

“Deposing of an evil despot and killing as many terrorists as possible certainly does.”

You know, I think that ^^^ is an even stranger definition of “stable” than you tried out on us before. Just for grins, how would you define “chaotic?”

• Link
• Report this comment

” hate them, I really do, and their fellow travelers.
And I will never not hate them.”

It is sad people like this can vote.

• Link
• Report this comment

It was stable when President Bush left office.

|tchy cc, just how many idiotic, perverted lies can you string back to back to back?

And though a rhetorical question, they are nonetheless sickening.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Our self interest in the natural resources of another country justifies killing?”

Another liberal with a reading comprehension disorder.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Criminalizing politics is a very dangerous step. The truth is that by the time the war began, a strong if not overwhelming majority of Americans supported it. This is a stain on our nation, not just on those individuals who led it at the time.”
Jay I disagree. If somebody yells fire in a theater a lot people will believe that and repeat it too. The only person who is guilty is the one who yelled fire. The others are innocent.

• Link
• Report this comment

dammit, Jay’s 10:34 beat me to it.

yes, there WERE WMD’s in Iraq more than 20 years before we invaded … guess what! NONE HAVE BEEN FOUND since 2003.

NONE

NADA

NIENTE

thus refuting W’s primary reason for invading.

• Link
• Report this comment

“What about those who voted in favor of the war?”

Actually…there was no vote “in favor of war”…there was a vote authorizing the President to DECIDE if there should be a war. Not at all the same thing.

• Link
• Report this comment

St Simons

These people should hang high for treason, or war crimes.
It is one of the darkest moments in US history.
I hope this debacle is the epitaph to the Republican party.
I hate them, I really do, and their fellow travelers.
And I will never not hate them.

My dear friend, as you may know, I have read a lot of Gandhi and King and other proponents of non-violence and peaceful change.

And I have tried desperately to not hate these murderous men and their followers.

But in my darker moments, I fail…

• Link
• Report this comment

BTW, did anyone contribute to the Scooter Libby Defense Fund?

I did. I sent them a check for 46 cents. And they never cashed it.

• Link
• Report this comment

It is sad people like this can vote.

More passive/aggressive crap.

Own your emotions, sport.

Don’t make them the responsibility of others.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Ah YES, and there we have it ladies and gentlemen!! The mask comes off and one of them finally drops all pretense and admits that regardless of the cost in mayhem and human slaughter and money, it’s ultimately all WORTH IT. Because it’s about imperial hegemony, in its purest naked form”

Heck, the original name for the Iraq invasion showed that: Operation Iraqi Liberation

OIL

• Link
• Report this comment

I almost didn’t want to go there, but I must.

To take it a step further, if we hadn’t had l’affaire Lewinsky, Gore almost certainly would have won in 2000

Jay, if you mean this the way I THINK you think you mean it (and I know, already, of your opinion that Clinton should’ve resigned over that scandal)…

No. America did not disapprove of Clinton. Not to the point that they didn’t forgive him his trespasses. America loved the man.

(Still do, really. America might well be re-re-re-re-electing him in 2016 if mid-20th century conservatives, butthurt over FDR’s ability to get meaningful social programs legislated, hadn’t made such things impossible.)

America knew Clinton was a tomcat when they elected him. They didn’t want their twentysomething daughters behind closed doors with the guy, but they were fine with him calling the shots, otherwise. Clinton was riding 60+% approvals during and after the impeachment proceedings, and Clinton went out with similar numbers. (and this is via Gallup, which if anything probably underreported Clinton’s popularity.)

So if you’re saying that the fibbing-about-an-extramarital fling turned America off that Administration and poisoned the water for Gore and made it close enough for the fake Texan to steal, you are just flat out (and uncharacteristically) wrong.

However–

If you’re saying that Democrat Losership Council types on Team Gore persuaded Al that it somehow made sense to Veepify a tut-tutting prude by the name of Joe Lieberman who’d been prominent in his criticism of Clinton as some kind of insulation against campaign attacks on that score, and that Al thought he needed to “stand on his own” apart from the Big Dog as well, whilst campaigning in 2000 (rather than sensibly recycling a “stay the course” refrain that put Clinton on the stage with Gore every possible moment)…

and THAT stupid reaction to l’affaire Lewinsky made the ticket less popular? you might have something. In fact I’d say you’re right.

But, sadly, I suspect it’s the former bit of Beltway “wisdom” you’re repeating, and Jay, if that’s the case, you are wrong, times infinity, so very very wrong.

(In my humble and utterly amateur, not-a-major-historian, opinion.)

• Link
• Report this comment

I stopped debating the merits of the war as soon as our soldiers feet hit Irag soil. From that moment on, right wrong or indifferent I wanted our military to win quickly and decisively. The constant debate of should or shouldn’t did nothing to help our soldiers and if anything, caused us to be less aggressive than necessary (hence the need for the surge). I will NEVER dishonor those that made the ultimate sacrifice by debasing there lives as having no more meaning than a barrel of oil.

It is too easy and too safe to comment with 20/20 hindsight.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay
March 20th, 2013
10:41 am

Ok but that is not what I asked.

I am aware of your position on drones, I agree in basic terms but I do not feel ” proper care” has been taken in targeting, not with the amount of reported innocent children killed and wounded by the strikes.

If we can get enough intel to know what house or business thy are in we can gain enough to strike when there are not so many kids around.

On that I suppose we disagree.

However the original question was do you feel The AJC has done an adequate job of being skeptical of the drone program?
Can you point me to articles written on the subject by The AJC?

Are you taking the administration at their word that proper care is being taken or are you looking at it with a skeptical eye? (Not one to answer just one to think about)

• Link
• Report this comment

“but I’m not talking about an “argument”…I’m talking about a country that decides, for whatever reason, that he IS a tyrant and that for out own good they need to invade us and remove him.”

Well Doggone, I know this is a hypothetical, but if I KNOW one thing, I can just tell you this: the invader will lose.

• Link
• Report this comment

“It is too easy and too safe to comment with 20/20 hindsight.”

I would agree with you…but those of us who paid attention are talking with the FORESIGHT we had AT THAT TIME. Anyone who was here at the time can tell you that *I* was LIVID that Congress passed that authorization to use force. And I still am.

• Link
• Report this comment

It is too easy and too safe to comment with 20/20 hindsight.

Some of us had 20/20 foresight, and it’s not our fault that you didn’t, sport.

• Link
• Report this comment

Doggone/GA
March 20th, 2013
10:44 am

Point taken mr literal. ( definition 2 based on my iPhone)

However, would it not be easy to argue that by giving the president said decision making power they indeed voted to go to war, as there was no real doubt as to the course he would take?

• Link
• Report this comment

NONE HAVE BEEN FOUND since 2003.

NIENTE

He sent them to Syria. Sean Hannity told me so, anyway.

• Link
• Report this comment

Scratch It @ 10:31 am

“So – Iraq is worth spending 6 trillion on, but we want to gut Medicare and Social Security? you conservatives are bordering on retarded.

Wow. $6 trillion. Thats a reach..”

I realize that facts are likely to affect you like water did that green lady from the west but here’s an article detailing a study that supports the $6 trillion number. Interesting the last section of the article contains this telling paragraph from the report:

“The report concluded the United States gained little from the war while Iraq was traumatized by it. The war reinvigorated radical Islamist militants in the region, set back women’s rights, and weakened an already precarious healthcare system, the report said. Meanwhile, the $212 billion reconstruction effort was largely a failure with most of that money spent on security or lost to waste and fraud, it said.”

It ends with yet another justification of the war and its $6 trillion dollar price tag by a Bush era sycophant.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/03/14/us-iraq-war-anniversary-idUSBRE92D0PG20130314

• Link
• Report this comment

“Well Doggone, I know this is a hypothetical, but if I KNOW one thing, I can just tell you this: the invader will lose”

And do you consider that we have “won” Iraq?

• Link
• Report this comment

10:54 – Maybe you are finally seeing the light?

• Link
• Report this comment

“kurd village”

The bitter joke the left made in 2003 was that we knew very well Saddam had WMDs, because the US had the receipts for them!

Really, WMDs were the second justification Bush had for the invasion. The first was 9/11, but there were too many quick objections that all the 9/11 hijackers were from other countries and there was zero proof that Saddam knew anything at all about it, let alone supported it. The second justification was WMDs, but Hans Blix and Joseph Wilson made that doubtful enough to some of us that by the time the invasion was rolling, the reason had mutated to regime change. Then in became “creating a stable democracy.”

I’m with Granny G. I didn’t buy the war from the start, and people in my office treated me with pity and embarrassment. Neighbors tore down the yard signs I put up. I was a kid during the Vietnam War, and I well remember how that war had broad support in the early stages, but that was nothing like the support for the Iraq invasion in the US. And I’m angry with Bush and Cheney, but most of my fellow countrymen supported them wholeheartedly.

• Link
• Report this comment

“It is too easy and too safe to comment with 20/20 hindsight.”

Jay was not commenting in hindsight during the war, and got most of it right.

A lot of people around here were also commenting about the war over at the Luckovich blog back when that was the only opinion blog. Its not hindsight.

The people that debased our soldiers are not Jay and the bloggers here, it was Bush and his neocon buddies that debased them by starting the stupid war in the first place.

• Link
• Report this comment

Zoso and alittlecommonsense :

Thank you for the liberal quotes on their support of the War in Iraq.

However, Jay and other liberals on here will ignore them as the facts do not support their
political agenda today.

• Link
• Report this comment

“10:54 – Maybe you are finally seeing the light?”

What do you mean “finally”? If Bush had done what he SHOULD have done: gone in, got Osama, and got out. We wouldn’t still have soldiers IN Afghanistan to begin with.

• Link
• Report this comment

Thank you for the liberal quotes

yeah, we’ve never seen THAT copy/paste of pre-war quotes a billion times, dumped by some right-wing wanker, EVER before.

• Link
• Report this comment

JAY

It’s amazing at that time that Rice, other senior decision makers, Bill Clinton and the like were convinced of the Iraqi threat. I often wonder why so much stock was put into validity of whatever data flowed thru a intelligence group which became a shell of it’s former self.

War is never an option IMO unless our shores are directly threatened. Seems every president has to use military mite simply because we have such amazing defense toys..

It is easy (and possibly accurate) to lay 100% fault on the decison making at the time. I wonder if we will ever know what we currently don’t know…

BO need not make the same mistake by popping around Iran…can you imagine?

• Link
• Report this comment

@Filter, thank you. That report of the total cost plus interest at 6 trillion for the Iraq war will never make it to Faux News, hence the “conservatives” on here will never really grasp how much war is costing tax payers.

• Link
• Report this comment

10 least tourist friendly countries is led by Bolivia, Venezuela is #2 and Iran is only #4. Most friendly – Iceland followed by New Zealand.

• Link
• Report this comment

I presume the great Colin Powell quote has been surfaced already..you know “if you break a county you own it”..?

• Link
• Report this comment

If our economy does not survive then we do not survive as a nation and our children do not prosper.

And nothing makes an economy thrive like vanity wars to protect access to filthy, climate-changing fossil fuels.

• Link
• Report this comment

…yeah and we feel that way about the Kennedy’s (sic).

Who is this we that you speak for, willie?

Do you have so little conviction in your own beliefs that you have to include imaginary backers to make them seem important?

It matters not what you (plural) vs you (singular) feel about them, willie, you have cast your lot with these marauding, regime change lunatics.

And for no other reason than that they have an R after their name.

Which I’m fairly certain makes the families of those four thousand, four hundred and eighty six Americans who died because of the sheer stupidity and hubris of George Walker Bush and Richard Bruce Cheney, feel a damn bit better. And only because of huge medical advances, is that number not 12,000 higher.

Nor the 31,926 who were injured, nor the 1,500+ major limb amputations and on and on and sickeningly on.

And for the willfully myopic, why an R is not likely to see the inside of the West Wing for a long time…

• Link
• Report this comment

If our economy does not survive then we do not survive as a nation and our children do not prosper.

The ends justify the means.

Not rational, rationalizing.

“The road to hell is paved with good intentions.”
– Thomas “Saint Bernard of Clairvaux” Jefferson

• Link
• Report this comment

11:00 – Clinton knew where Osama was, had a chance to terminate but for political reasons – PASSED. Why don’t you blame Clinton instead of it’s always Bush’s fault? Bush didn’t create Osama – and we were attacked on 911.

• Link
• Report this comment

If you look at my post I did not say one way or the other where I stood on the merits of the war. I cannot change what happened and cannot go back in time to force a new decision or sprinkle fairy dust to make it all go away. What happened is done, time to look after the troops…… I can just as easily squeel about how I hate Bush, hate the war, look at me, look at me. but at this point does it really matter.

The war was a huge waste of resources when you look at the end result.

• Link
• Report this comment

td

March 20th, 2013
11:04 am

We don’t need the damn oil…no amount of oil is worth the dead and wounded who returned for nothing.

BTW has BO gotten off his a%s and pushed through delinquent benefit payments to those promised? He needs to get those alledged leadership skills in motion. 2000% increase in delay for some…

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/14/veterans-benefits_n_2875637.html

• Link
• Report this comment

Reports are coming in from Israel that President Obama’s limousine, often called “The Beast,” has broken down. You might be wondering how the most protected vehicle in the world could break down on an overseas visit, and the answer would surprise you. Apparently, somebody filled The Beast with diesel fuel instead of gasoline, according The Times of Israel. As the report goes…

“The Americans filled it up with diesel, rather than petrol,” reports Channel 2 – stressing that it was the Americans, not the Israelis.

What does the Secret Service do when the President’s ride has been compromised this way? Since calling a cab is out of the question, they reportedly have a replacement limousine being flown in from in Jordan. “Son of Beast,” we’ll call it.

• Link
• Report this comment

You call it misleading.

Some might say it was outright lying. Making statements without verifying their validity is lying.

• Link
• Report this comment

Again, as usual, progressives were right about something. We usually are, and time usually bears this out.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Heck, the original name for the Iraq invasion showed that: Operation Iraqi Liberation

OIL”

It’s more than simply oil, Doggone.

It’s about symbolism. Assertion of hegemony and a flexing of unilateral will as the dominant force in geopolitical affairs. Pax Americana to out-Rome Rome.

• Link
• Report this comment

Can anyone on this forum convince me that we have engaged in any wars since WWII that were vital to the security of our shores..or otherwise was worth the death of a single citizen?

Get a haircut, hippie.

• Link
• Report this comment

Jefferson

March 20th, 2013
10:54 am

Gore did win, the SC took the prize and gave it to President Bush, and the rest is history.

That conspiracy myth has been debunked so many time it is not even funny any longer.

• Link
• Report this comment

Going to see Elton John in concert tonight in Macon, Ga. – see, I don’t agree with some of his politics but I believe, unlike the far, far left that he has a right to his opinion and I am not going to boycott him for it. I will also be eating at Chick – Fil – A.

• Link
• Report this comment

Someone upthread used comments by Scott Ritter in 1998 to support the invasion of Iraq. That’s ironic, because Scott Ritter, the UN weapons inspector, OPPOSED any invasion of Iraq. Here is what he was saying in 2002 in War on Iraq: What Team Bush Doesn’t Want You To Know:

“There’s no doubt Iraq hasn’t fully complied with its disarmament obligations as set forth by the Security Council in its resolution. But on the other hand, since 1998 Iraq has been fundamentally disarmed: 90-95% of Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction capacity has been verifiably eliminated … We have to remember that this missing 5-10% doesn’t necessarily constitute a threat … It constitutes bits and pieces of a weapons program which in its totality doesn’t amount to much, but which is still prohibited … We can’t give Iraq a clean bill of health, therefore we can’t close the book on their weapons of mass destruction. But simultaneously, we can’t reasonably talk about Iraqi non-compliance as representing a de-facto retention of a prohibited capacity worthy of war. (page 28)

We eliminated the nuclear program, and for Iraq to have reconstituted it would require undertaking activities that would have been eminently detectable by intelligence services. (page 32)

If Iraq were producing [chemical] weapons today, we’d have proof, pure and simple. (page 37)

[A]s of December 1998 we had no evidence Iraq had retained biological weapons, nor that they were working on any. In fact, we had a lot of evidence to suggest Iraq was in compliance. (page 46)]”

• Link
• Report this comment

If it was the wrong thing to do, why did the democrats in congress vote for it too?

And THIS is a simple-minded point that should never go unchallenged.

Why do vinny and Morality and others allow their neoconservatism to cause them to fail so abysmally at mathematics?

Jay, myself and others have REPEATEDLY pointed out that a substantial MAJORITY OF DEMOCRATS VOTED AGAINST THE WAR.

This war belongs smack in the lap of the 97+% of Republican lapdogs – and their backers – who voted to allow the Worst Ever to do you know what in you know where…

• Link
• Report this comment

ITS STILL ALL BUSH’S FAULT.

• Link
• Report this comment

Holding grudges for such lengthy periods is really bad for you. It seems anytime progressives can evoke the ghost of GW it peps them up or does it bring them down? WE have bigger problems now than we had then so can we move on?

• Link
• Report this comment

No grudges asclown just the facts…

• Link
• Report this comment

“Can anyone on this forum convince me that we have engaged in any wars since WWII that were vital to the security of our shores..or otherwise was worth the death of a single citizen?”

Impossible to say as we can never know how history would have been affected if different course of actions would have been made.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Holding grudges for such lengthy periods is really bad for you”

tens of thousands of dead Iraqis and allied troops say “what?”

• Link
• Report this comment

“Reports are coming in from Israel that President Obama’s limousine, often called “The Beast,” has broken down. ”

it got stuck in Ireland

Jm want to immigrate to Singapore.

He’ll end up in Bangalore.

• Link
• Report this comment

11:22 War against obesity.

• Link
• Report this comment

JamVet, if you are still out there, you should sign up for Fred’s March Madness bracket.

• Link
• Report this comment

Obama thinks it was a success. So much so that had people working to extend our stay there.

How the Obama administration bungled the Iraq withdrawal negotiations

http://thecable.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2011/10/21/how_the_obama_administration_bungled_the_iraq_withdrawal_negotiations

• Link
• Report this comment

11:23 _ I do and even if I didn’t I would still eat there ’cause it is better than Bubba King and McFat.

• Link
• Report this comment

About Reg Dwight (who I did happen to see live, long ago)?

I think most who go see him expect to mostly hear stuff from 20-40 years ago, and I’m sure he still delivers the goods.

• Link
• Report this comment

Unicorns only appear to virgins.

• Link
• Report this comment

11:25 – Guess you like RAP and HIP HOP……. no talent, no imagination – just random four letter words.

• Link
• Report this comment

“Guess you like RAP and HIP HOP……. no talent, no imagination – just random four letter words”

================
Come mothers and fathers throughout the land
And don’t criticize what you can’t understand…

-Robert Zimmerman

• Link
• Report this comment

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 20th, 2013
11:26 am

Did I say it was?

Why it said full disclosure.

I find it odd 90% supported it at time but rarely do you hear one claim it now.
I did, didn’t say it was anyone’s fault, took responsibility for it actually.

Now for another full disclosure just for you.

I do not like not have small dogs.

Simple reasons I do not like that they bark without apparent reason, not knowing what they are barking at.
And I do not like leg humpers.

Hmmmm ever notice how much you have in common with a Cesky

• Link
• Report this comment

“Well, there is a distinction between a “war”, an “armed conflict” and a “humanitarian intervention””

When was the last time you heard the “Iraqi war” referred to as the “Iraqi armed conflict” or the “Iraqi humanitarian intervertion”?

• Link
• Report this comment

Typical Dem/Lib spin job. The facts are that the attack had backing from the administration and from a majority of Dem/Libs and Pub/Cons in House and the in the Senate. Were many of them reluctant supporters with strong trepidations? Yes, but in weighing all of the risks, the attack on Iraq and the tyrant, Saddam Hussein, was warranted. Based on the best intelligence we had at the time, and the continuing actions of Saddam, and the plausible risk of WMD’s in Iraq at the time, including chemical weapons, which he had already used on the Kurds (never, ever mentioned in these Dem/Lib, after the fact spin pieces), and later concerns that he was firing rockets into Israel with nerve gas war heads, it would not have been prudent (to quote the senior and wiser Bush) not to go in and make sure that this mad man did not possess nuclear or chemical weapons.

That said, there is no question that the whole thing went off the tracks after the fighting ended in a lopsided US military victory – a foregone conclusion from the start. From the day of the ridiculous, Bush jet fighter “fly in” and the stupid “Mission Accomplished” celebration, until now, the whole operation has been a waste of American lives and treasure. No argument there. Why? Because of a complete lack of planning by Bush, Cheny, Rummy, and Rovey, and the military top brass.

After the last Mission Accomplished speech, they all looked at each other and said, Now what? They had not a clue as to “what.” It is very unfortunate that Bush the younger did not have the wisdom of his father, and just bring every one home after we determined for certain that there were no WMD’s, and that he listened to Cheney and Rumsfeld, who enthusiastically led us into Vietnam redux. And because Bush allowed Cheney and Rummy to run the war that ensued on a shoe string budget, American lives were lost – until the surge took place and Rummy was fired.

American cannot and should not send the message to our enemies contained in this 10 year spin piece — don’t worry — we will never take miliatary action again. Just do your thing. The message needs to be that America will do what is necessary to protect its interests, and once that is done, it will be over. But that will destabilize regions the spinners cry. And that is different from the way it is today, how? Tyrants destabilize regions, not just action.

The shame of the Iraq war was not that it took place. It was for a noble purpose, it determined that there was no WMD threat, and it deposed a murderous tyrant. The shame was that we had not a clue what to do after victory. There was no plan except to just hang around an do “nation building” — which did not work in Vietnam and had even less chance of working in the Muslim culture. This is what Americans should demand never happen again. Not that we tell the tyrants of the world to do what you will, with no fear of American action.

• Link
• Report this comment

11:29 BRING IT ON! Dixie Hicks were fake. That recent picture of Mutterin Maine looks more masculine than John Wayne…… what’s with her hair style? UGH!

• Link
• Report this comment

At least we are out of Iraq now and soon will be out of Afghanistan. Sooner the better. Had no business outting ground troops in either place.

Just don’t send troop to Syria.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dunwoody Granny
March 20th, 2013
11:30 am

Well tell us all which mythical creature you wanted to appear?

Maybe someone here has a contact with Mr. Roarke????

• Link
• Report this comment

“would TOTALLY not hold a grudge for dying violently”

and for a lie

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK … no longer a rainy Friday, but still mildly cranky

oh, and Scratch – you attributed the deaths in Afghanistan to Obama’s lack of engagement –

prove it.

Oh sure…

http://icasualties.org/

• Link
• Report this comment

The facts are that the attack had backing from…a majority of Dem/Libs….

Good work.

A blatant, childish lie in the very first sentence.

I’ll leave it up to others to find those that follow, as I stopped right there…

• Link
• Report this comment

11:36 – A little constructive advice here. Jay’s lemmings have an attention span of about TWO minutes and any blog taking longer than that to read will go right over their head,

• Link
• Report this comment

Jay you need to start writing about real news. Like obama releasing his final four picks instead of releasing his budget.

http://nation.foxnews.com/march-madness/2013/03/20/obama-releases-final-four-picks-not-his-budget

• Link
• Report this comment

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-7Y0ekr-3So

Appropriate for all wars where politicians have mislead us.

• Link
• Report this comment

Had the public been allowed to know the depths of deceit, including outright treason, that the Republican Party had exhibited…from Nixon’s sabotage of Vietnam peace initiatives in ‘68, the real reason for the Watergate burglary, the undermining of the earlier release of the Embassy hostages, their true role and horrors of the Iran/Contra mess, to all the election/vote rigging…all in the name of getting and keeping power, not only would this Iraq thing never have happened, 9/11 would just be a date on the calendar and, in fact, the Country would never have voted for another Republican for anything, much less President. Hell, we’d probably even be energy independent by now with Global Climate Change clearly on the mend. These are things that we, finally, have verified evidence of…one day we’ll know the answers to more – like why did Building Seven collapse?

• Link
• Report this comment

Scratch –

and, again. where is proof of Obama’s lack of engagement

• Link
• Report this comment

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes

March 20th, 2013
11:37 am

…you bed wetters want to… [...] …you bed wetters want…

Golden shower much?

Just as I thought you would rather make a smart ass comment instead of addressing the issue about who is going to lead if you think America should not lead.

• Link
• Report this comment

td

Why do you think we needed bases in iraq? That’s what we have aircraft carriers for…

• Link
• Report this comment

HERE’s my take on IRAQ and “W” . The Dems wanted to increase the unfunded and underfunded socialist social programs and “W” wanted the Iraq War supported and funded by Congress – so enough Dems voted for the war and enough Repubs voted for the spending and that is what you call C O M P R O M I S E. I’m not big on compromising my morals myself.

• Link
• Report this comment

I do not like not have small dogs.

You wanna translate from gibberish into English, sport?

• Link
• Report this comment

To take it a step further, if we hadn’t had l’affaire Lewinsky, Gore almost certainly would have won in 2000

Talk about the “butterfly effect” eh?

Not that I buy into this, but it makes for interesting naval contemplation:

If Bill had kept his pants up and Monica her mouth shut…9/11, Iran, and Afghanistan may not have happened…as well as the Arab Spring in Libya and Egypt followed by others…
I guess we can call it the BJ effect…. the lives and unsettled governments…all over/for a oral sex!

• Link
• Report this comment

…instead of addressing the issue about who is going to lead if you think America should not lead.

No one can lead from a deceptive position.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dixie Chicks SHEETZ

• Link
• Report this comment

May God have no mercy on their cold dark souls.

• Link
• Report this comment

Dixie Chix SHEETZ!

• Link
• Report this comment

Welcome to the Occupation

March 20th, 2013
11:40 am

td: “So who should be leading the world if not us? Please do not tell us some utopic vision that all nations should be equal or no nation should be the most powerful because that is nothing more then a BS fantasy. There has never been a time in the history of the world when the strongest, most powerful and most aggressive nation did not lead”

Please don’t think I’m calling you personally fascist when I say that that’s some nice proto-fascistic ideology you’re espousing there.

And it’s not that I disagree entirely with the notion that force and power are the world. What I am saying though is that we are members of a political community and a tradition where the belief in rule of law presumably holds ‘might is right’ in check. That’s sort of what World War II was fought over. Supposedly was fought for anyway.

Sorry to inform you but it is not just the Fascist that believe in power and the UN would not even had become into formation unless the 5 strongest countries in the world had veto power over any lawful measure the other 200 odd counties wanted to pass.

As far as the “rule of law” in this nation. It has become obvious during the current administration that laws mean nothing any longer. Just look at Obama’s public refusal to enforce the immigrations laws, DOMA laws and the justice departments refusal to prosecute any voting rights cases when it is Whites involved or illegal gun applications.

• Link
• Report this comment

My fear is we will repeat this again somewhere else in 30 or so years. When earning my MBA there was an observation made that corporate memory fades after about 30 years. Companies will then make similar mistakes that they had made a long time ago. I think the same can be true for government. I was about 35 years after the conclusion of Vietnam that we started the war in Iraq. Somewhat similar circumstances and very similar results.

• Link
• Report this comment

According to the poll used 90% or near 90% approval one week after troops feet hit the ground.

Marty, just curious why do feel compelled to make up stuff out of thin air?

Do you really adore GWB THAT much?

Days before the March 20 invasion, a USA TODAY/CNN/Gallup Poll found support for the war was related to UN approval. Nearly six in 10 said they were ready for such an invasion “in the next week or two.” But that support dropped off if the U.N. backing was not first obtained. If the U.N. Security Council were to reject a resolution paving the way for military action, 54% of Americans favored a U.S. invasion. And if the Bush administration did not seek a final Security Council vote, support for a war dropped to 47%.

An ABC News/Washington Post poll taken after the beginning of the war showed a 62% support for the war, lower than the 79% in favor at the beginning of the Persian Gulf War.

Perhaps you should consider being the next Republican president’s White House spokesman. (Presuming you live long enough !LOL!)

• Link
• Report this comment

tens of thousands of dead Iraqis and allied troops say “what?”

southpaw says “how do they do that?”

• Link
• Report this comment

Looming on the horizon is Iran and Korea nuclear weapons, which are pretty real. Should we just be bystanders. What say all you fortune tellers, how will this go?

• Link
• Report this comment

Kamchak ~ Thug from the Steppes
March 20th, 2013
11:48 am

To my shock you didn’t read on.

To help you.

You remind me of a small dog.

You go all barking off at something but didnt take the time to even know what you were barking at.
Or as small dogs do just simply barking at the obvious.

Also you tend to be a little bit of a leg rapist here, tending to just latch on and hump away with posters you think you disagree with.

And just like small dogs I don’t like you both for the things you have in common personality wise.

• Link
• Report this comment

Should we just be bystanders. What say all you fortune tellers, how will this go?

Hell no.

I say we take all of the neocons in the 101st Chairborne and air drop them off over there to fix that problem!

And since Bill O’Reilly has experiences in firefights, he can lead the charge…

• Link
• Report this comment

USinUK … no longer a rainy Friday, but still mildly cranky

Scratch –

and, again. where is proof of Obama’s lack of engagement

Well if stats aren’t good enough I guess I could come up with pics.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/02/17/obama-plays-golf-in-florida-with-tiger-woods/

http://deadspin.com/5984904/tiger-woods-and-president-obama-play-golf-together-constitute-nightmare-scenario-for-old-white-dudes

http://caffertyfile.blogs.cnn.com/2012/06/06/do-politicians-who-hang-out-with-celebrities-help-or-hurt-themselves/

http://content.usatoday.com/communities/onpolitics/post/2012/04/barack-obama-celebrity-president-american-crossroads-/1

• Link
• Report this comment

The thing about neocons is that the LEVEL of their lies is so amazing.

Any intelligent person would look at Marty’s idiotic claim about 90% of Americans first supporting the botched invasion and laugh their arses off. Seriously.

But these Bushbots?

They are so used to f&cking up everything that they touch — even statistics and definitions – that to them, it doesn’t even raise the first eyebrow.

Mental midgetry abounds…

• Link
• Report this comment