Bush Conceeds No W.m.d.s

[tazwegion]

I've lost count to how many times (local) supporters of the Bush Administration have attempted to force home the issue of WMD's, that their existence was indeed fact... and any suggestions to the contary was propaganda & lies!

 

Well finally Bush admits they don't exist, like him or not you gotta' admire that (albeit) brief period of total honesty

 

 

 

* dons flamesuit *

[Kamikaze_Badger]

Old news.

 

Thing is? For years the UN believed the same thing .

 

And he's being a true man by taking the blame for it, unlike some other politicians. He's accepting the fact that he made a mistake, and I doubt the Iraqi's hate him for it. They now have a democracy, and in a few hours as of the writing of this post, will be having their elections two and a half years before schedule.

Edited December 15, 2005 by Kamikaze_Badger

[LoArmistead]

Umm....WMD's do exist. Bush admitted that the intelligence was faulty, not that Saddam had no WMD's. I watched the speech, every word of it

 

Only in a liberal mind would "Much of the intelligence was faulty" translate to "Saddam didn't have WMD's." You have successfully put words in the presidents mouth. Bush did not even attempt to remotely insinuate that Iraq had no WMD's, because that is not true. Iraq, in fact, did have WMD's, I don't see why that is so hard to understand.

 

Before anyone gets carried away about how the war is a failure since we didn't find vast armaments of WMD's within the country, let me remind you that there is a very very long list of reasons why we went to war with Saddam (many of which Bush outlined in his speech today...but I doubt the liberal media mentioned that). The only item on that list the liberals concentrate on is "WMD's" because it's the only thing on the list that hasn't been a success. Typical doom and gloom.

[Duke Atreides]

You know there are many, many loberals just praying that the elections tomorrow are a failure because without George W Bush they would not have happened.

 

Almost time to come out of vacation mode.

[LoArmistead]

The liberals won't even mention the elections. Deep down inside they hope the elections will fail, it will just give them one more reason to hate the evil satan Bush. If they are success, I guarantee you will not hear a PEEP out of any of them.

 

The fact is, liberals are self-centered. They think about themselves, how things make them feel before they make any decisions. If something makes them feel uncomfortable, they won't go through with it. It's the only reason why most liberals believe we should've never gone to war. They have no sympathy for the people of Iraq. THey have no clue how rough life can be. They will sit there and gripe about how we are "absuing" detainees at abu Ghraib and violating their human rights... why didn't they say anything about Saddam abusing human rights by murdering thousands of innocent people in that very same prison just five years prior? They are in favor of an abortion, a murder of a helpless, innocent child, but they are against the death penalty for Tookie Williams, who murdered four innocent people in cold blood, including a father of two, two eldery people, and their daughter who was with them. It's politics, it's self centered, and it shows a lack of compassion and sympathy for the essense human life - innocence.

 

If there is anybody out here that honestly believes in the hard rock bottom of their heart that Saddam had no WMD's, please speak up.

[Gremlin]

Regardless the elections are going to be failure or not, once every U.S. soldiers leaves Iraq (whenever they do), you know there are going to be more suicide bombs.

 

Yes only the conservatives see there was WMD's in Iraq. Jeez. It took him how many speeches to admit he acted on wrong intelligence. Too many too count.

 

Believe what you will I pray the elections succeed. They have already intercepted a truck load of fake ballots from Iran. Iraqi soldiers should be involved in the security for the current election and let the U.S. Soldiers stand aside. That is a best test to see how they do.

[Kamikaze_Badger]

Risking an event as big as the election by taking soldiers away? Just to test the still young Iraqi Military? Mind if I have what you've been smoking?

 

And after there was real proof (read: not bullcrap) about there not being WMDs, he admitted to them being non-existant.

 

For 12 years before the war, the UN believed them to be there. For 12 years, Saddam would not allow them to do searches. We have found biological weapons of mass destruction and death. Nerve gas, mustard gas, anthrax, etc. Of course, they don't count as WMDs because they don't make mushroom clouds, right?

 

God.

[LoArmistead]

Yes only the conservatives see there was WMD's in Iraq. Jeez. It took him how many speeches to admit he acted on wrong intelligence. Too many too count.

 

Believe what you will I pray the elections succeed. They have already intercepted a truck load of fake ballots from Iran. Iraqi soldiers should be involved in the security for the current election and let the U.S. Soldiers stand aside. That is a best test to see how they do.

597712[/snapback]

 

He has said multiple times in multiple speeches that the intel was faulty and that he taked responsibility (he even said it during the televised presidential debates against Kerry in 04).

 

The fake ballots story was a flop. An Iraqi general claimed later this morning that the story was untrue. Here's a cool question - how could a truck cross the border with a load of fake ballots when the borders were closed?

 

Let the US soldiers stand aside - that's exacly what we are doing. In Baghdad, we are keeping US troops in the bases, and the only people out in the streets are going to be Iraqi soldiers. US trops will only be used if there is an attack.

 

 

Now I'm going to retire from this thread before it gets out of hand. My point has been made, this was just a stupid thread from the get-go... why is it that every time I post something positive about the war, taz is not far behind to post something negative? I guess that's just a coincidence Anywho, taz, keep putting words in the president's mouth and using articles to support ideas that don't actually exist, you're doing a great job. :thumbs-up:

[jammin]

The liberals won't even mention the elections.  Deep down inside they hope the elections will fail, it will just give them one more reason to hate the evil satan Bush.  If they are success, I guarantee you will not hear a PEEP out of any of them.

 

The fact is, liberals are self-centered.  They think about themselves, how things make them feel before they make any decisions.  If something makes them feel uncomfortable, they won't go through with it.  It's the only reason why most liberals believe we should've never gone to war.  They have no sympathy for the people of Iraq.  THey have no clue how rough life can be.  They will sit there and gripe about how we are "absuing" detainees at abu Ghraib and violating their human rights... why didn't they say anything about Saddam abusing human rights by murdering thousands of innocent people in that very same prison just five years prior?  They are in favor of an abortion, a murder of a helpless, innocent child, but they are against the death penalty for Tookie Williams, who murdered four innocent people in cold blood, including a father of two, two eldery people, and their daughter who was with them.  It's politics, it's self centered, and it shows a lack of compassion and sympathy for the essense human life - innocence.

 

If there is anybody out here that honestly believes in the hard rock bottom of their heart that Saddam had no WMD's, please speak up.

597702[/snapback]

 

Firstly, I will say that I couldn't give a hoot about the whole were there or weren't there issue with the WMDs or the reasons for invading (liberating, whatever you want to call it) Iraq in the first place. Its in the past, I don't think it really matters anymore.

 

I think its great that the Iraqis are getting elections so soon, and as long as they go well (without undue outside influence, in a democratic way that is) then I will be a happy man.

 

Now, I have relatively liberal views (as far as I can tell.. I'm pro abortion [the choice to have it] and against capital punishment, but those points can be argued some other time I'm sure), and one thing I don't like is the generalisations you just made.

 

I might poke fun about conservatives from time to time, but it will be in jest.

I suppose I just don't like this whole one side versus the other thing in politics (disagreeing just for the sake of it), so don't like it when it's reinforced like that.

 

Unless you weren't actually serious of course, then I'm sorry.

[Kamikaze_Badger]

Me and LoArm usually joke around a lot about Liberals, as opposed to generalizations common among some others, whom I will not point fingers towards ().

 

And I agree with you on the "disagree because of the political party" thing. I even wrote a little something about it.

[LoArmistead]

I'm rarely serious, but there wasn't anything funny about my abortion and capital punishment. If you don't necessarily fall into that catergory I just described, that is perfectly normal; not everyone is exactly alike.

 

For those of you who don't want any spin on Bush's speech, here is a transcript of it...word for word.

 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/20...20051214-1.html

[Kamikaze_Badger]

but loarmisteed, we all no dat da whythaws lik, chanjus it an shat, yo! only jon kery kud tel us da truth!

Edited December 15, 2005 by Kamikaze_Badger