I DON'T KNOW WHY THE U.S GOVERNMENT LIKES WARS YET THEY CALL THEMSELVES DEMOCRACY....I THINK WAR IS LIKE BLOOD IN THEIR VEINS...THEY CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT IT....SHAME ON THEM...I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WILL SAY AT THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT....
Rove was right. I'll take Korn's cornhole bet. Having inspectors in country and having inspectors allowed to go where they want, WHEN they are two very different things.
@AV84USA Hans Blix was the chief inspector and he says that he had unlimited acess to all sites he asked for. Sites that CIA suggested. All the sites he visited there was nothing, no weapons.
@paleoton That's right. The inspectors all have multiple accounts on record and the stories match. The inspections were conducted and the sites monitored so that no weapons could be transported out of the sites prior to said inspections. We covered our bases quite well with visual monitoring as well as sources within the Iraqi government who confirmed that Saddam disarmed long before the UN inspections were requested and subsequently launched.
@klote2314 does it matter that the millions that died in Vietnam did not even want to be there?? WW2 brought a sense of urgency to the nations where the overwhelming majority were supportive of the war effort. Vietnam, like Iraq, had massive protests, deflectors, the majority did not support the war. Vietnam you began to hear the words , "young people dying NEEDLESSLY" The general population did not believe in Nam OR Iraq like they believed in WW2.
The provision of chemical precursors from United States companies to Iraq was enabled by a Ronald Reagan administration policy that removed Iraq from the State Department's list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. Thiodiglycol, a substance needed to manufacture mustard gas, was among the chemical precursors provided to Iraq from US companies such as Alcolac International and Phillips.
General Georges Sada, a top Iraq general indiacated that Iraq indeed did have WMDs. They used Sarin and Chlorine gas during Iranian war, Sarin gas to kill thousands of Kurds, and many drums of "yello cake" Uranium for the miltary purposes only!
Sadly this clip portrays the opposite false information. Now when the world sees this they will believe lies. So justice will be twisted and the world will hate America for imputing justice.
You're either DENIED access, or you have EVIDENCE. You can't simultaneously be denied access and have knowledge of the secret weapons program. THIS is the "brain damage", you're supposed to believe contradictory statements.
I'd still like to know what the argument about the US being a Republic vs Democracy is based on. It's used over and over, and it's essentially meaningless. A 'Republic' simply means citizens elect a leader. Why this clashes with the idea of representative Democracy, a necessary result, is truly unexplainable.
If Bush is a liar, so are the Democrats that voted for the Iraq War Resolution in Oct. 2002 and for the TARP funds. Democrats gave us an unconstitutional war in Kosovo and made the ORIGINAL case for regime change in Iraq during the '90s.
@KUBARKops They were less liars than just plain old gullible. Like Manuel Noriega and Saddam Hussein, they trusted the Bush crime family on good faith, and ended up learning a hard lesson.
@KUBARKops You don't understand. Most of the American politicians are in it to win it, winning it being making themselves a shit load of money. I would say it analogous to "selling your soul to the devil". It's pathetic.
The GOP was wrong and we shouldn't of gone into Iraq There was no evidence of weapons of mass destructions Bush was stupid and he failed as a president in my book
yeah, there was even a video I watched a while back, where the UN Inspectors were caught putting things on weapons to make them look like they were from saddam, but were in fact American made weapons, and that's another lie.
Genocide? 64,562 civilians in Iraq have died do to direct military actions that's from Day 1 of the invasion to today. That number includes the deaths by Iraqs own military, right down to traffic acceidents with military vehicals. This from the U.N., and 4 other independent investigations by other agencys from other countrys
Are you one of those people who ignore the facts and yell about "millions of deaths!" post that I dare you to look that stupid
Schuster doesnt like anything conservative or anything tied to the GOP because he thinks they hate gays(like he is, come out already) and this is the single reason liberals aka gays hate them.
BadBunnyRides: That's funny you say that because companies in Netherlands, West Germany (at the time), France, and the U.S were linked to starting the Saddam's chemical program. As much as you wish it wasn't true, yes U.S companies were involved as well. In fact, some cultures for the biological weapons were linked through DNA to samples from the United States.
I'm only trying to let you know the bad behavior was spread throughout the globe at that time, it wasn't just Europe.
Was going to write a lot here but there's a better example here on youtube. Look up "Lord of War, life of a bullet". Watch that to the end. Then answer me this simple question; who killed that kid at the end?
The USA didn't fly over and sell Saddam those chemicals, they may got there but not by leagle means.
He had the means to deliver those weapons as well. I was there when we blew the artilery storage site that had shells just waiting to be filled.
F33bs: Not to pick on this comment, but those countries you listed, while they do have oil resources and territory, don't have a military based on 1970s-1980s Soviet era equipment, like Iraq did. Not that I think that this was an oil-based war at all, quite the contrary as I've stated early this was a continuation of 30-40 years of Middle East policy.
I'm not sure who you said this in response to (Youtube's comments are sorting weird) but I wanted to comment that military strength is a factor.
One of our biggest mistakes was missing our opportunity to prosecute Rove, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. Yeah Saddam is dead, but those fuckers should be strung up by their vaginas. After it was all said and done, think of the all the blood on their hands - Just so we could do Iraq the way the Brits did India.
the problem with Republicans is not that they lie ( cause truth..all politicians lie)...but the Republicans stand on a high pedestal, high horse, and preach down to you....while lying, cheating, etc.
We get it yt, all republicans are the devil and all democrats are the mostest perfect people to ever grace this planet. Anyone with half a brain knows there are good and bad on both sides. Well except for the media.
Is there any news outlet or even wanna be news outlet that isn't biased? Anyone? Bueller?
What an evil, lying son of a bitch. May God damn the lot of them. Tens of thousands of dead people because of that evil lying bastard. I hope there is a special Hell for people like that. Fucking sociopathic cannibalistic sons of bitchs.
Is the queer bait hosting this video really this stupid. Saddam had over a year, 15 months to be exact to get rid and hide any WMDs. Of course they had but the left loons are so anti Bush they will stop at nothing to try and discredit him. Ted Kennedy, Babs Boxer, Hilary Clinton, Nancy pelosi, Jane Harman MUST ALL BE LIARS BECAUSE THEY CLAIMED THE SAME THING BUSH DID AND VOTED FOR THE WAR. This is a small list...over 60 dems knew they Hussein had WMD.
Even if Saddam did have WMD's. The very fact that you and your party were so afraid of him..It was laughable and slightly sad. I don't like our country showing weakness like that.
Double that up with a Saudi loving president in W who refused to go after the people responsible for 9/11 and even let the criminals family leave the country...Well...That's treasonous in my book. It would be in yours as well if you had any respect for the founders of this nation and the principles it was built on.
@4thetruth401 Good to see that you feel that those that voted for the war would have made bad leaders.
There's far too many partisan GOP hacks out there that would like to portray the image that Obama can't hack it. However, If his next 3 years are like his 1st one you will be proven right.
Even then the only valid point that can be made that is that more Americans need to support a 3rd party because a return to failed GOP leadership is clearly not the answer.
when I heard condeleeza rice talking about aluminum tubes = nuclear weapon that the whole thing was a lie. watch?v=HyWsyqLDYjE she was told that they were not. Yellow Cake was a lie and bush was told so and then tried to destroy the people who told him so. If you still have any doubts that bush lied to get us into a war you are an idiot fox news watching moron.
these fucking idiots talking over each other and shit. this type of video isnt even entertaining, i dont even care about who is representing the right facts. i fucking hate their kind. i fucking hate them so much.
@PurpleJacketJoker Amazing to think that a bunch of spineless Democrats who were given misinformation would take the politically safer route of supporting a popular president at a time when fighting back was political suicide. This is not about what politician played smart politics but about what claims of fact were made by those in a position to know the truth. The certainty with which Bush stated there were weapons was false and to this extent he lied to the American people.
Then the governments of our Allies lied to their people as well. I saw Tony Blair say he believed they had WMD's as well. And before you say Bush lied to our Allied governments, they had their own intelligence reports.
Do you know who else believed we had WMD's? Democrats like Hilary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards and 26 other Democratic Senators. 82 House Democrats voted to go to war.
The Democrats saw the same intelligence reports that the Republicans saw.
Yes. We were all led to believe the "pre-selected" "pre-filtered" or "cherry picked" intelligence presented by the Bush Admin. They actually hired Powell to deliver the lie. They thought they put a more credible person to say the lie, it will make the lie more credible.
Bill Cliton on many occasions spoke about iraq WMDs. Google it and see for yourself. If a country refused to come clean and either has WMD or makes us belive they have WMD then that country should be destoryed as an example.
Iran is asking to be nuked and we should oblige. If there is a 1% chance that iran will allow a terrorist to bring in a dirty bomb into the US, then that is enough evidence for me to NUKE THEM TO HELL.
Its hard to say if the CIA intelligence reports were doctored before Powell got them. Britain got their intelligence reports from their own team unedited and still thought Saddam had WMD's. Many other countries joined the fight as well, so there wasn't much descent coming from other countries.
ummmm yeah so the Democrats were hoodwinked by that evil, lying son of a bitch. Or maybe they knew too but were too afraid to stand up to Bush and crew. The chickenhawks like bush and cheney did such a great job of wrapping themselves in the flag. To oppose them was to oppose God! Fuck you, and fuck the evil people that you've chosen to make idols of.
Carl Rove lied about the Iraq inspectors---PERIOD.
You can rattle off as many names of Democrats and Republicans as you want, teabagger, but that doesn't change that fuckin' fact. Accept it, chickenhawk.
@PurpleJacketJoker And who provided that so called intel to the leadership of the Democrats? The CIA did. Who was running the CIA at the time? George Tenet... ("oh it's a slam dunk, they have them") The false intel about WMDs was only one part of the whole lie sold to American people, getting us into Iraq. And if they lied about WMDs, what else did they lie about?
@PurpleJacketJoker Then Hillary, Edwards, etc were wrong just like you were.
If you had any integrity you would admit you were wrong instead of saying you were right to be wrong because others were wrong too. By saying this, you prove to be the textbook definition of a lemming.
GUESS WHO ELSE SAID SADDAM HAD WMD's? The intelligence gathering by other governments. Guess who else in our gov't agreed with that intelligence? Hilary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards and 26 other Democratic Senators. 82 House Democrats voted for War against Iraq as well.
@PurpleJacketJoker What's really sad is that isn't hard to prove. It's ironic that everyone here tells us to go look up things for ourselves yet refuses to do so when told the same thing due to some kind of superiority complex.
Fellow Americans. In a matter of days, we will find out once for all what kind of country we want. Will most accept enslavement to the state for economic equality, or will most demand a return to living in the land of the free and the home of the brave?
If health care take over passes. Will most Americans accept defeat? Or will they demand a return to limited government and maximum liberty, even by threat of open revolt? These coming days will shape America forever.
"christian"republicans have learned their bible & practice it religiously since pat robertson pushed his political "agenda" on US in the late 70's. it continues to this day in more subtle but verdant ways!
these ignorant bastard believe these lies even though they've lived thru the truth.
their "christian" mantra (bible) is to lie et al,
look to the sky for forgiveness, get it, then sin again.
their bible's nothing but a license to hate. it's the only accomplishment they have...HATE & LIES!
...but people ARE stupid and don't know the facts. They will believe anything they see on Fox because they are brainwashed by those hate-mongers over there.
The Iraq war was one the most scandolous things done in history, its humiliating and still hard to believe we are there. I feel for the soldiers and the Iraqis that have no idea what the hell is going on. the excuse for us there now is to restore democracy. If all we wanted to do was restore democracy in one country, we might as well have invaded venezuela, cuba, mexico, somalia, and so on by that logic. even we have shit gov't, oh but we cant overthrow our gov't right?
I swear these Ted Bundy Republicans could tell thier supporters that they are eating Big Macs while their asses are between 2 slices of white bread. And they would believe them!
In about 4 or 5 years, this is going to make a great ass movie on one the biggest scandals in U.S. history. I was in fuckin high school thinking "Why the fuck our we going to IRAQ". when high schoolers are saying that, you know there was something wrong in the beginning. Im glade this is finally starting to unravel
Bill Kristol is a true terror warrior. Thanks to patriots like him the iraqis and afghanistanis are free from the grips of their terrorist dictators. We didn't find the weapons of mass destruction becasue osama gave them to Iran (our next stop on the terror ass kicking tour) and to al ciada sleeper cells around America who are waiting for a ron paul presidency to strike. It costed more to deliver freedom then Bill thought, but without his great ideas millions of more people might have died.
Protecting America from radical islamofascistnazicommunist terrorists is the conservative thing to do. When they start dropping suitcase icbm thermonuclear dirty bombs (like iran is working on plus the nucks they got from Iraq) their going to deploy their nucks as soon as ron paul gives his code words during a pro-terrorist speech on the house floor. Also Most tea partiers are terror ass kickers like me, the beatiful and lovely and intelligent sarah palin and the real reaganity Dick Cheney.
Okay, regarding the Clintons, it might be true to a very small degree. However, Bush Jr. loved war 100 percent in his administration which supported violence in Iraq which ended up having terrible repercussions on the rest of the world.
I'm not sure I understand your stupid remark about "brown people." If you mean Afrian-American, then your statemnent isn't true. Lyndon Johnson, who is a democrat, supported the civil rights act in the 1960s. Stop being an idiot, airborne.
mort- Of course puppet Bush is for the war so does puppet Obama. That's the fake left/right paradigm.
As far as "Brown People" you did not know Aabs have brown skin? The frauds on the left have not made a peep since they have a brown man in The White House.
Your boyfriends Bush Jr.. Cheney and Rummy were all part of the declared war on Iraq. Obama has nothing to do with being unconstitutional and undelared. Your lovers Bush Jr. and co. did.
I'm getting a tired of your bullshit. Many of the so called "brown people," as you so lovingly state, are also American citizens as well. I don't understand how you can connect the Iraq war with being "racist." I'm referring to your dumb statements of "brown people." Knock if off.
The American government is evil and the American people are fat, worthless, spineless loosers. They don't have the ability to tell truth from lies. A large majority of them are un-educated idiots who actually take pride in being stupid...it's quite sad really.
LET FREEDOM RING-LEGALIZE IT! legal weed = Free health care for everyone legal weed = More room for violent offenders in prison legal weed = Less trees cut for paper legal weed = Jump start for the economy legal weed = Streets paved with gold(well, maybe not streets paved with gold) ALL POSSIBLE BY TAXING THE USE OF THIS WONDERFUL PLANT! click my name for ringtone tell the CIA i left town! visit me @ jimmytheweed. com myspace. com/hotpancakesatnoon purevolume. com/jimmytheweed
We're talking about Iraq, not the Mujahideen in Afghanistan.
People love to forget this, but it was Jimmy Carter who gave Saddam those weapons, a supposed "anti-war liberal" (laugh) who greenlighted the Iran-Iraq War which killed 5x more than the liberation of Iraq did.
F33bs: After reading more of your posts, I have some more clean up to do. Between 1982-1983 (Reagan's first term) the United States smuggled howitzers, helicopters, bombs and weapons to Iraq through third party countries. In 1983 Reagan himself asked Italy's Prime Minister to send Iraq weapons. In December of that year Rumsfeld when to Iraq to reestablish diplomatic ties. In 1986, American intelligence sent satellite images and weapon calibration methods to Iraq. All Carter's fault huh?
Yes, thank you JamaicanJasta for the history lesson. I am well aware of the war of 1812. However, when looking at the agreement in the treaty, the US came out wayyyyyyy more on top than Great Britain. Therefore, most historians consider, (such as myself) that the US indeed were the victors in the war of 1812.
houstonrockets616: Well let's look at the agreement to see who really ended up on top huh? The original prewar American complaints of Indian raids, British impressment (you know what I mean by this right?) and blockades (stopping trade with Napoleonic Europe) were not addressed at all in the Treaty of Ghent. There were no territorial gains from Britain, in fact nothing that America had complained about was dealt with in the treaty. The only thing that happened was a cessation of hostilities.
houstonrockets616: You are calling yourself a historian, something I'm not going to debate, but you incorrectly reference the Treaty of Ghent and the consequences of the War of 1812. I mean, the treaty was the definition of "status quo ante bellum" and you're here claiming it was lopsided in favor of America, no it was not. Britain broke international law with several practices before the war and none of that was addressed. Did you actually study that war, or are you making it up?
It was lopsided in America's favor... however that is a subjective case, and i tend to view it as such. Maybe you should do a little more research of your own before you try to push your so called "facts" onto someone with as much education in the US history field as myself. Britain may have broke those laws, yet the Treaty before the battle of New Orleans WAS in the American's favor. Review the treaty, and then come back and talk to me. Thanks, have a nice day.
houstonrockets616: Seeing as how I actually read the original document before commenting, I suggest you READ the treaty. For all the education you claim to have in U.S. History, your syntax errors and historical omissions make me believe otherwise.
The terms of the treaty are used as an example of "status quo ante bellum" in high school. Something that a world class historian such as yourself should know. Yet your lack of knowledge on this topic is very apparent.
houstonrockets616: You don't even know what laws Britain violated, nor do you know why the United States declared war. Don't take your ignorance on this topic and make up history. The Treaty of Ghent set the borders back to pre-war status, the British never returned the slaves they captured and the impressment issue was never addressed.
Here read the actual document champ: avalon. law . yale . edu / 19th_century / ghent. asp
Am I a Reaganite? What have I said that could be construed as anywhere close to Reaganism? Can you quote me?
No. You can't.
I don't play this type of game, buddy. You wanna argue against a stereotype and figment of your imagination, go ahead. I won't stop you.
However I'm not going to defend or even discuss positions I've never taken, especially about Reagan, who I think was an idiot, a clown and who committed treason by financing terrorists in Nicaragua as well as Iraq.
F33bs: I mentioned Reagan because when the topic of funding third world dictators came up all you seem to mention is "Jimmy Carter did X, Y, Z". So yes you appear to be a Reaganite because you're missing the point, AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY failed these last 30 years. It wasn't one political party or another, it was a pattern of bad decisions made at all levels of government, which chose expediency over certainty. I hope that's something you can agree with, otherwise I don't know what to say.
Great, you mentioned Reagan and couldn't quote me. Now stop mentioning him. Because I don't like him, at all.
See the post where I stipulated the fact that I'm a liberal, registered Democrat, supporter of Obama, intern at Organizing For America and committed leftist.
Now I think this is enough to cement my anti-Reagan credentials, no?
My point about Carter is that liberals give him a free pass, and voila, what do you know, I brought it up in a thread where I'm arguing with liberals.
F33bs: Well, it really didn't matter to me whether you were a liberal/conservative/whatever I'm really here to discuss the points. I say that because titles like that lead to people making assumptions on policy preferences, which don't always end up being true.
I actually agree with the Carter comment, but it annoys me when people try to parse American policy in that region by president, when it's been fairly consistent for 3-4 decades.
"we (the United States) have a habit of supporting"
I don't remember voting to support Saddam. You mistake the CIA for "America."
In my opinion, the CIA ought to be caged shut and demolished tomorrow for precisely that reason.
However which is the right thing to do, get off your ass and pressure your congressman not to support the CIA, or sit on your ass in front of Olbermann and act like you are some anti-war rebel while you down a Mr. Pibb and text your friends?
F33bs: It's funny how you assume what I have and have not done. I regularly call and write my representatives regarding issues. You also assume I watch cable news. In fact your whole post was one terrible assumption. And yes, you did vote to support Saddam if you voted for Reagan in the 1980s, as HIS appointees were involved with supporting Saddam. Here's my assumption for you, stop eating those pork rinds, they're causing you to break out, wash your face and put on a shirt.
Unfortunately the CIA realized a long time ago that if they funded themselves (Iran/Contra, endless front companies, Afghan opium etc. etc.) that they could become over unity.
I hope it's not true but I believe (opinion) that even if we "demolished" it today, we would need to ensure that the ashes were cast to the sea for many years to come. You can't just demolish something that took so many years and lives to create.
You can't disentangle the CIA from the US. If you could do that, there would not be any responsibility left. So far, Americans have not gotten off their asses, so they silently agree to the practices of the CIA.
BTW.: I'd like to add Sakashwili of Georgia to the list above. He is like a miniature Saddam. And he also got a lot of support from the Republicans.
Just read the history of the Iran/Iraq War and you will see how the US and other countries aided/supplied Iraq in building up its arsenal on WMD's which Saddam in turn ended up using on his own people (kurds) as well as Iranians.
We have receipts to prove it. To the Iraqi ministry of education. Under the guise of research. We also gave the green light for him to invade Kuwait. Then we have the further galvanization of middle easterners "being bad" from the anthrax attacks, be headings, acid attacks...
Read history not selected history.
All these things came to pass because history is selected not learned.
American will NEVER forget the fact that we were LIED into a war! We were lied into believing that the Iraq war was a necessary response to 9/11!Our fears and tragedy was used as a platform for mass-murdering...not to mention in the name of "FREEDOM"!Bush,Rove and company are the REASON why 4000+ American soldiers are DEAD! Instead of focusing on Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, the OIL in the middle-east was more valuable than the blood of an American soldier! Shame on you Rove and all the NEO-CONS
Not to mention America lost 4000+ American soldiers...more American deaths than in 9/11! The civilian death toll in Iraq is off-the-charts! today...pretty much everyday there is a road-side bomb in Iraq! Did this happen when Saddam was the head?There is no denying Saddam was demented,there are thousands other leaders in countries who are demented!Why didn't Bush help Zimbabwe or Rwanda by sending military to topple the leader??The answer lies in the name of a corporation...HALIBURTON!
It was obvious that Iraq DID NOT have weapons of mass destruction! The fear propaganda in UN with "hand-made" computer graphics showing "evidence" of WMDs was condemned by majority of the countries! The argument that "it got rid of saddam" is just despicable in the eyes that the ENTIRE war was perpetuated on the premise of WMDs and how Iraq was a THREAT and had a hand in 9/11! And don't give us the bullshit of "the ingredients were present"!Well...why didn't we attack North Korea?Why IRAQ?
No because we didn't "steal it for ourselves," and you have not one fact or source that proves that.
That's the main difference between the two choices. Adding propaganda to the mix just makes you look stupid, and uninformed.
Foreign companies bring in huge amounts of wealth, and are a proven tool in lifting poverty, provided Iraqi's Parliament can stave off US hegemony (which is a valid concern).
Once again, the issue is complex, and it can't be reduced to "Waah! Bush bad!"
You shouldn't talk to your elders like that., sonny boy. You would have been 12 at the time, and you clearly don't know what you're talking about now, so who knows what you were like then.
George W. Bush never presented any actual evidence. It was all found to be untrue, and it's not like nobody noticed BEFORE we declared war. The Niger Uranium lie was debunked. The Sadaam Osama link was debunked.
Heck Bush started his war without UN approval so that he could preempt the UN inspector report
The SSCI concluded that "repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed.
My question is how do you pass on 'unsubstantiated, contradicted' intelligence without it being deliberate deception?
Interesting to see how a congressional whitewash becomes part of history and the truth slips down the memory hole.
It does not change ANY false pretenses for starting the war, the lies our own president told us, the fact that Bush knew there were NO WMDs in Iraq, the fact that the yellowcake had been sealed legally 12 miles from Baghdad, was well known about when we went in the first time, was not weapons grade, had not been touched since 1991, along with the fact that Iraq had NO means to implement it since they lacked nuclear facilities after Operation Opera.
It was all supposition and invention by neo-con hawks. They wanted to de-nationalize Iraqi oil, and it wasn't just about deposing Saddam, or else Iraqi oil would still be managed by the Iraqi government.
They wrote a lot of this down in a little thing called the PNAC "white-paper." Apparently Dick Cheney brought maps of Iraq to his secret energy meetings as well.
They're robber barons who don't believe in the public good, so why should they believe in it for Iraqis?
No, but nice statistic. I love how you pulled it out your ass. The majority of those deaths were caused by lack of infrastructure, or health care due to the invasion.
What else do you think occurs? It's horrible, yes, and it may seem unnecessary, but you also don't know what it is like living under a dictator.
It's easy for you, as a 14 year old whose lived in relative safety in the US, who bashes capitalism while living off the teat of 3rd world labor.
But there is a world outside of Louisiana full of problems that can't be reduced to petty polar politics, and you might be forced to make hard decisions as in Iraq.
F33bs: Your ex post facto justifications don't make those families feel better about those deaths. In fact, your argument sounds VERY familiar to those made by the very people we're fighting. Again name calling and taunts detracts from what you're trying to say, even if I was inclined to share your world view, I'd say it was for the wrong reasons. Yes 'petty polar politics' are unable to solve world issues, but neither are unilateral actions and hasty foreign policy.
F33bs: Never claimed to 'win a dispute' here, I used the word as it was an appropriate way to describe the example I was using. Also, "moral justification" is something I know that you know is a very slippery slope. This is because a set of morals honestly varies between person to person and varies greatly between cultures. If we're speaking morally, then we shouldn't associate with countries like Saudi Arabia who oppresses its people under state sponsored dogma.
Syntax errors? Are you blind? Just take a good look around, to see where you are standing right now.. ITS FUCKING YOUTUBE! Well... excuse the hell out of me for my "syntax errors." I never claimed to be a world class historian of the matter... which give me the insinuation that you are lacking in the comprehension field. Something a historian CAN NEVER be insufficient in. Maybe I will have to re new your hooked on phonics subscription. If you really want to discuss the war, do so. but no more BS
houstonrockets616: Ignoring your logical fallacies for just a second, I did discuss the war. In fact, I listed FACTS not opinions, and I gave you a link to the complete treaty. Comprehension is only relevant in your case as you've claimed to read this document, yet you make up that America ended up 'WAYYYY AHEAD'. Again read the actual document and see what happened. Look at documents from New England during the blockade, in fact what I'm saying to you is READ MORE, SPOUT LESS GARBAGE.
houstonrockets616: Honestly, I can't say this is a discussion because you haven't even bothered to read the source material. While the course of history is subjective, the facts are not. Objectively, what did America gain from Britain? Britain violated America's neutral right to trade, and this was not solved by the Treaty of Ghent. Only the end of the First Napoleon War solved as a by-product. The territory America gained in Canada was returned in the Treaty.
F33bs: I guess to encapsulate what I'm saying, I feel the Iraq War (with as many positive outcomes for both the Iraqi people and our national security as it has provided) just represents an overt version of our actions in the last two decades. Yes it's nice to export freedom, liberty and such, yet the pattern of behavior hasn't changed. Geo-politically, we want a strong Iraq to counter the influence of Iran. For those same reason we bolster Israel and Saudi Arabia in the region.
F33bs: (continuation of my last post) There's nothing WRONG for wanting to have that security of interests (going back even into the early 1970s with the Twin Pillars policy) in that region, but to claim the motivate was purely altruistic is short-sighted. Yes a people have been freed from a brutal dictator, but that was not the driving force. As you aptly listed with other example nations, "moral justification" isn't always enough.
F33bs: Hasty foreign policy equals supporting the dictator of the week because you want to stand them up against Anti-American Country #21, or invading a nation without having SOME concrete post-military objectives other than catch phrases like "Beacon of Freedom in the Middle East". It's lazy thinking that leads you down this path.
The death doesn't have to happen to innocent people, 'sweet heart'. They may no longer be living under a dictator, but they're still living under harsh conditions. What's good about democracy, when the candidates don't care about you?
Oh lord, really? I 'suck the teat of third world labor'? My clothes were made in a union factory in the US, my computer runs Linux, not Windows (As Microsoft uses third world labor), and just about everything else I buy is from the US.
Also, we still have that whole million deaths we need to talk about.
Iraq, and for that matter the whole of the middle east, is an extremely hostile and increasingly unstable place. We can't fix their problems by assassinating the dictator, who gave the citizens infrastructure and health care, then destroying everything in the area.
Sometimes when I think about having to support a war as unpopular as Iraq and argue against all my peers on the left, I remember just who has the intellectual and moral high-ground here, and it's me.
You help exemplify the reason for the struggle, if I may say so, and you make it clear which side is really worth fighting for, regardless of mob opinion.
I DON'T KNOW WHY THE U.S GOVERNMENT LIKES WARS YET THEY CALL THEMSELVES DEMOCRACY....I THINK WAR IS LIKE BLOOD IN THEIR VEINS...THEY CAN'T LIVE WITHOUT IT....SHAME ON THEM...I JUST DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WILL SAY AT THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT....
sammynassy2012 8 months ago
Knowing all of this, why is it not okay to accuse the Bush administration of LYING about Iraq? Not wrong, Lying?
Eaglesfaninca 11 months ago
If Sadam had WMD's. Why didn't he use them when the U.S. invaded Iraq?
panterguy 11 months ago
Liar liar pants on fire changing history nobody believes their lies. No student of history will be fooled.
abby495 1 year ago
Rove was right. I'll take Korn's cornhole bet. Having inspectors in country and having inspectors allowed to go where they want, WHEN they are two very different things.
AV84USA 1 year ago
@AV84USA Hans Blix was the chief inspector and he says that he had unlimited acess to all sites he asked for. Sites that CIA suggested. All the sites he visited there was nothing, no weapons.
paleoton 1 year ago
@paleoton That's right. The inspectors all have multiple accounts on record and the stories match. The inspections were conducted and the sites monitored so that no weapons could be transported out of the sites prior to said inspections. We covered our bases quite well with visual monitoring as well as sources within the Iraqi government who confirmed that Saddam disarmed long before the UN inspections were requested and subsequently launched.
-Joe E Dangerously
xJoeEDangerouslyx 1 year ago
Should change the name from Republican Party, to Lying Party for War and Serfdom.
mrcoder 1 year ago
no one knows the truth. everyone is dumb who tries to comment on this and think theyre right
aurhys 1 year ago
@aurhys What the fuck do you mean? Where are the WMD's?
ancoloco 1 year ago
Dude for the sake of America, plz deport such idiots to Antartica or s'thing. This is ultra bullshit
prit0sidd 1 year ago
what is hans doing these days snice he went into Iraq, and said no WMDs, and was proven to be right?
KangaKucha 1 year ago
last war was WW2...the rest have been bullying. period.
charms71 1 year ago 10
@charms71 eh no the last real war that the US was in was against North korea and Vietnam
those are forgotten wars but millions of people died in that war
klote2314 9 months ago
@klote2314 does it matter that the millions that died in Vietnam did not even want to be there?? WW2 brought a sense of urgency to the nations where the overwhelming majority were supportive of the war effort. Vietnam, like Iraq, had massive protests, deflectors, the majority did not support the war. Vietnam you began to hear the words , "young people dying NEEDLESSLY" The general population did not believe in Nam OR Iraq like they believed in WW2.
SkinnyWmn69 9 months ago
@klote2314 Vietnam war was not approved by congress.
charms71 9 months ago
Fuck WMD and Fuck the government.
7d7e7f7 1 year ago
Obama is saying
Omg they're are WMDs in Iran and we must invade.
Didn't this just happen?
GovernmentSham912 1 year ago
@GovernmentSham912 apparently you guys have problems with memory :P
Darusdei 1 year ago
The provision of chemical precursors from United States companies to Iraq was enabled by a Ronald Reagan administration policy that removed Iraq from the State Department's list of State Sponsors of Terrorism. Thiodiglycol, a substance needed to manufacture mustard gas, was among the chemical precursors provided to Iraq from US companies such as Alcolac International and Phillips.
Zooni2 1 year ago
The gas that Saddam used on the Kurds was sold to him by the US.
Zooni2 1 year ago 10
@Zooni2 itwas sold by a dutch en swiss dude
eyupcan1996 1 month ago
General Georges Sada, a top Iraq general indiacated that Iraq indeed did have WMDs. They used Sarin and Chlorine gas during Iranian war, Sarin gas to kill thousands of Kurds, and many drums of "yello cake" Uranium for the miltary purposes only!
Sadly this clip portrays the opposite false information. Now when the world sees this they will believe lies. So justice will be twisted and the world will hate America for imputing justice.
bobisnohere1 1 year ago
You're either DENIED access, or you have EVIDENCE. You can't simultaneously be denied access and have knowledge of the secret weapons program. THIS is the "brain damage", you're supposed to believe contradictory statements.
BeauJames59 1 year ago
I'd still like to know what the argument about the US being a Republic vs Democracy is based on. It's used over and over, and it's essentially meaningless. A 'Republic' simply means citizens elect a leader. Why this clashes with the idea of representative Democracy, a necessary result, is truly unexplainable.
Asymmatrix 1 year ago
If Bush is a liar, so are the Democrats that voted for the Iraq War Resolution in Oct. 2002 and for the TARP funds. Democrats gave us an unconstitutional war in Kosovo and made the ORIGINAL case for regime change in Iraq during the '90s.
KUBARKops 1 year ago
@KUBARKops They were less liars than just plain old gullible. Like Manuel Noriega and Saddam Hussein, they trusted the Bush crime family on good faith, and ended up learning a hard lesson.
FuhQTube 1 year ago
@KUBARKops No the Dems just didn't think these idiots would be stupid enough to LIE TO THE ENTIRE WORLD!!! But... they were.
dimeacyd 1 year ago
@KUBARKops You don't understand. Most of the American politicians are in it to win it, winning it being making themselves a shit load of money. I would say it analogous to "selling your soul to the devil". It's pathetic.
NYCFreed1 1 year ago
The GOP was wrong and we shouldn't of gone into Iraq There was no evidence of weapons of mass destructions Bush was stupid and he failed as a president in my book
Rosgo66 1 year ago
Cool story bro, Clinton bombed iraq multiple times in the 90s over wmd and people died.
St984 1 year ago
yeah, there was even a video I watched a while back, where the UN Inspectors were caught putting things on weapons to make them look like they were from saddam, but were in fact American made weapons, and that's another lie.
1981z28camaro 1 year ago
dont foeget the 67 dems who lied as well
Hellpig 1 year ago
World will never forget the American GENOCIDE in Iraq and Afghan. We will never forget.
SuperFakap 1 year ago
@SuperFakap, and the world still hasn't forgotten the genocide of millions of jews by the Germans.
Eric8542009 1 year ago
@SuperFakap
Genocide? 64,562 civilians in Iraq have died do to direct military actions that's from Day 1 of the invasion to today. That number includes the deaths by Iraqs own military, right down to traffic acceidents with military vehicals. This from the U.N., and 4 other independent investigations by other agencys from other countrys
Are you one of those people who ignore the facts and yell about "millions of deaths!" post that I dare you to look that stupid
BadBunnyRides 1 year ago
Technically, he did.
OlimDeus 1 year ago
Check out Green Zone...may not be completely authentic but it makes u think
Charmer4856 1 year ago
Way to pussy out on a bet....
UndeadLight 1 year ago
Schuster doesnt like anything conservative or anything tied to the GOP because he thinks they hate gays(like he is, come out already) and this is the single reason liberals aka gays hate them.
4thetruth401 1 year ago
mutherfucker caught with redhanded
qcdisciple 1 year ago
*ahem* The countries who sold him the Chemicals admited they did so, did you miss that? It wasn't the US, look more "East".
BadBunnyRides 1 year ago
BadBunnyRides: That's funny you say that because companies in Netherlands, West Germany (at the time), France, and the U.S were linked to starting the Saddam's chemical program. As much as you wish it wasn't true, yes U.S companies were involved as well. In fact, some cultures for the biological weapons were linked through DNA to samples from the United States.
I'm only trying to let you know the bad behavior was spread throughout the globe at that time, it wasn't just Europe.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
Was going to write a lot here but there's a better example here on youtube. Look up "Lord of War, life of a bullet". Watch that to the end. Then answer me this simple question; who killed that kid at the end?
The USA didn't fly over and sell Saddam those chemicals, they may got there but not by leagle means.
He had the means to deliver those weapons as well. I was there when we blew the artilery storage site that had shells just waiting to be filled.
Why would he have those?
BadBunnyRides 1 year ago
For the record, and in spite of your ignorance, Sudan has ample oil resources and territory.
As does Saudi Arabia, China and Iran. So your argument defeats itself.
F33bs 1 year ago
F33bs: Not to pick on this comment, but those countries you listed, while they do have oil resources and territory, don't have a military based on 1970s-1980s Soviet era equipment, like Iraq did. Not that I think that this was an oil-based war at all, quite the contrary as I've stated early this was a continuation of 30-40 years of Middle East policy.
I'm not sure who you said this in response to (Youtube's comments are sorting weird) but I wanted to comment that military strength is a factor.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
i remember over and over the white house making excuse after excuse about not being able to find any wmds and as far as i remember they never did
dragonflychainsaw 1 year ago
How many Dems said that Sadam had WMD's?
Lots! So are they liars too????????? Sadam also had plenty of time to hide or move their WMD's.
mtaylor7915 1 year ago
One of our biggest mistakes was missing our opportunity to prosecute Rove, Cheney, and Rumsfeld. Yeah Saddam is dead, but those fuckers should be strung up by their vaginas. After it was all said and done, think of the all the blood on their hands - Just so we could do Iraq the way the Brits did India.
TheMEGYBEAR 1 year ago 3
@TheMEGYBEAR The instant you start prosecuting former administration officials you open up the door to SO much more shit that it is worth.
OlimDeus 1 year ago
the problem with Republicans is not that they lie ( cause truth..all politicians lie)...but the Republicans stand on a high pedestal, high horse, and preach down to you....while lying, cheating, etc.
The "hipocrasy" ..
thecruiseliner 1 year ago
You republicans are retarded bastards!
padude64 1 year ago
The republicunts make me sick! Republicunts are liars!
padude64 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We get it yt, all republicans are the devil and all democrats are the mostest perfect people to ever grace this planet. Anyone with half a brain knows there are good and bad on both sides. Well except for the media.
Is there any news outlet or even wanna be news outlet that isn't biased? Anyone? Bueller?
menc231 1 year ago
What an evil, lying son of a bitch. May God damn the lot of them. Tens of thousands of dead people because of that evil lying bastard. I hope there is a special Hell for people like that. Fucking sociopathic cannibalistic sons of bitchs.
MrRedFredSaid 1 year ago
Hey schuster, wonder why your ratings SUCK??
well here ya go!!! When is schuster coming out of the CLOSET. He is like a sesame street character, queer as one too
4thetruth401 1 year ago
Is the queer bait hosting this video really this stupid. Saddam had over a year, 15 months to be exact to get rid and hide any WMDs. Of course they had but the left loons are so anti Bush they will stop at nothing to try and discredit him. Ted Kennedy, Babs Boxer, Hilary Clinton, Nancy pelosi, Jane Harman MUST ALL BE LIARS BECAUSE THEY CLAIMED THE SAME THING BUSH DID AND VOTED FOR THE WAR. This is a small list...over 60 dems knew they Hussein had WMD.
4thetruth401 1 year ago
Even if Saddam did have WMD's. The very fact that you and your party were so afraid of him..It was laughable and slightly sad. I don't like our country showing weakness like that.
Double that up with a Saudi loving president in W who refused to go after the people responsible for 9/11 and even let the criminals family leave the country...Well...That's treasonous in my book. It would be in yours as well if you had any respect for the founders of this nation and the principles it was built on.
raouldukelives 1 year ago
hey man not a republican or a dem...they both suck
4thetruth401 1 year ago
@4thetruth401 I agree, the Democrats that voted for the war were wrong like you and the GOP was.
And those that opposed the war from the start and questioned the Bush admin were proven correct.
And this is why you have president Obama and not Hillary right now. Hillary's yes vote on the Iraq war was the biggest mistake of her career.
Trollmaster21 1 year ago
ah there you go....hillary wasnt cut out for the job. and now we see that obama cant do it either.
4thetruth401 1 year ago
@4thetruth401 Good to see that you feel that those that voted for the war would have made bad leaders.
There's far too many partisan GOP hacks out there that would like to portray the image that Obama can't hack it. However, If his next 3 years are like his 1st one you will be proven right.
Even then the only valid point that can be made that is that more Americans need to support a 3rd party because a return to failed GOP leadership is clearly not the answer.
Trollmaster21 1 year ago
bush lied. let's move on
copcorona 1 year ago 3
when I heard condeleeza rice talking about aluminum tubes = nuclear weapon that the whole thing was a lie. watch?v=HyWsyqLDYjE she was told that they were not. Yellow Cake was a lie and bush was told so and then tried to destroy the people who told him so. If you still have any doubts that bush lied to get us into a war you are an idiot fox news watching moron.
conservobot 1 year ago
these fucking idiots talking over each other and shit. this type of video isnt even entertaining, i dont even care about who is representing the right facts. i fucking hate their kind. i fucking hate them so much.
jsax2012 1 year ago
The CIA and NSA report to the president. He then reports to the senate and congress. If he lies about wmd's then it's treason.
promethiusrising 1 year ago
and the reports were flawed.....see the 2004 congressional report on this
endless66 1 year ago
Comment removed
PurpleJacketJoker 1 year ago
@PurpleJacketJoker Amazing to think that a bunch of spineless Democrats who were given misinformation would take the politically safer route of supporting a popular president at a time when fighting back was political suicide. This is not about what politician played smart politics but about what claims of fact were made by those in a position to know the truth. The certainty with which Bush stated there were weapons was false and to this extent he lied to the American people.
siloria 1 year ago
Then the governments of our Allies lied to their people as well. I saw Tony Blair say he believed they had WMD's as well. And before you say Bush lied to our Allied governments, they had their own intelligence reports.
PurpleJacketJoker 1 year ago
Do you know who else believed we had WMD's? Democrats like Hilary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards and 26 other Democratic Senators. 82 House Democrats voted to go to war.
The Democrats saw the same intelligence reports that the Republicans saw.
PurpleJacketJoker 1 year ago
Yes. We were all led to believe the "pre-selected" "pre-filtered" or "cherry picked" intelligence presented by the Bush Admin. They actually hired Powell to deliver the lie. They thought they put a more credible person to say the lie, it will make the lie more credible.
lipa0902 1 year ago
Bill Cliton on many occasions spoke about iraq WMDs. Google it and see for yourself. If a country refused to come clean and either has WMD or makes us belive they have WMD then that country should be destoryed as an example.
Iran is asking to be nuked and we should oblige. If there is a 1% chance that iran will allow a terrorist to bring in a dirty bomb into the US, then that is enough evidence for me to NUKE THEM TO HELL.
nytech04 1 year ago
"Bill Clinton on many occasions spoke about iraq WMDs."
AND? Who gives a fuck about what that Republican Lite prick said?
So now yer gonna refer to "Slick Willy" as a valued and dependable source, teabagger? Fuck you, hypocrite!
And get your chickenshit, chickenhawk ass over there and stand up for what you believe in, you coward.
kurd55 1 year ago
Its hard to say if the CIA intelligence reports were doctored before Powell got them. Britain got their intelligence reports from their own team unedited and still thought Saddam had WMD's. Many other countries joined the fight as well, so there wasn't much descent coming from other countries.
PurpleJacketJoker 1 year ago
@PurpleJacketJoker -
ummmm yeah so the Democrats were hoodwinked by that evil, lying son of a bitch. Or maybe they knew too but were too afraid to stand up to Bush and crew. The chickenhawks like bush and cheney did such a great job of wrapping themselves in the flag. To oppose them was to oppose God! Fuck you, and fuck the evil people that you've chosen to make idols of.
MrRedFredSaid 1 year ago
Carl Rove lied about the Iraq inspectors---PERIOD.
You can rattle off as many names of Democrats and Republicans as you want, teabagger, but that doesn't change that fuckin' fact. Accept it, chickenhawk.
kurd55 1 year ago
@PurpleJacketJoker And who provided that so called intel to the leadership of the Democrats? The CIA did. Who was running the CIA at the time? George Tenet... ("oh it's a slam dunk, they have them") The false intel about WMDs was only one part of the whole lie sold to American people, getting us into Iraq. And if they lied about WMDs, what else did they lie about?
BenJr01 1 year ago
Exactly, even tho main people behind this are bush government for lying, democrats are quilty for not challenging
Lonao 1 year ago
@PurpleJacketJoker ...And they were WRONG too! But Bush and Cheney WANTED the war and we all know it.
kefluv 1 year ago
@PurpleJacketJoker Then Hillary, Edwards, etc were wrong just like you were.
If you had any integrity you would admit you were wrong instead of saying you were right to be wrong because others were wrong too. By saying this, you prove to be the textbook definition of a lemming.
Trollmaster21 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
GUESS WHO ELSE SAID SADDAM HAD WMD's? The intelligence gathering by other governments. Guess who else in our gov't agreed with that intelligence? Hilary Clinton, Ted Kennedy, John Edwards and 26 other Democratic Senators. 82 House Democrats voted for War against Iraq as well.
PurpleJacketJoker 1 year ago
A MAJORITY of House Democrats (126 DEM, 6 REP) voted AGAINST the Iraq War Resolution.
23 Senators (21 DEM, 1 REP, & 1 IND) ALSO voted AGAINST it.
Also: Obama (and Ron Paul) got it right - when it counted . . . AND when it took courage to speak out.
It will take years, if not decades, to clean up the Bush/Cheney fiasco.
RonPaulGeorgeRingo 1 year ago
@PurpleJacketJoker What's really sad is that isn't hard to prove. It's ironic that everyone here tells us to go look up things for ourselves yet refuses to do so when told the same thing due to some kind of superiority complex.
OlimDeus 1 year ago
Fellow Americans. In a matter of days, we will find out once for all what kind of country we want. Will most accept enslavement to the state for economic equality, or will most demand a return to living in the land of the free and the home of the brave?
If health care take over passes. Will most Americans accept defeat? Or will they demand a return to limited government and maximum liberty, even by threat of open revolt? These coming days will shape America forever.
RightWingTV 1 year ago
"christian"republicans have learned their bible & practice it religiously since pat robertson pushed his political "agenda" on US in the late 70's. it continues to this day in more subtle but verdant ways!
these ignorant bastard believe these lies even though they've lived thru the truth.
their "christian" mantra (bible) is to lie et al,
look to the sky for forgiveness, get it, then sin again.
their bible's nothing but a license to hate. it's the only accomplishment they have...HATE & LIES!
wntoply6 1 year ago 2
@wntoply6 That was.....scripted.
OlimDeus 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
who cares, we got to raise hell and it was fun watching the Iraqi's kill Sadam.
i like paying for the war but not anything the liberals like. i can't wait to fuk that democrook oduma out of office.
cold beer, californina buds and Sarah Palin... God bless the USA!!!
1Guitarslayer 1 year ago
Reagan gave saddam the ok to gas the kurds.
disturbed341 1 year ago
Schuster is a Neo-Con who has been a cheer-leader for this war from the beginning.
airborne373 1 year ago
...but people ARE stupid and don't know the facts. They will believe anything they see on Fox because they are brainwashed by those hate-mongers over there.
Rhakiel23 1 year ago
i cant believe this asshole-scumbag republican strategist thinks we're that dumb and stupid...
theoneali 1 year ago
lolol
TheRuiMartins 1 year ago
Of course he's lying lol. That's what they do. And when they get caught in there lies. There like dears in headlights lol..
Priestshooby 1 year ago
What ThE Fuck YT?
AngryStudioEngineer 1 year ago
The Young Turds!
AngryStudioEngineer 1 year ago
BOMB FRANCE
1Guitarslayer 1 year ago
The Iraq war was one the most scandolous things done in history, its humiliating and still hard to believe we are there. I feel for the soldiers and the Iraqis that have no idea what the hell is going on. the excuse for us there now is to restore democracy. If all we wanted to do was restore democracy in one country, we might as well have invaded venezuela, cuba, mexico, somalia, and so on by that logic. even we have shit gov't, oh but we cant overthrow our gov't right?
metalmosh6 1 year ago 2
I swear these Ted Bundy Republicans could tell thier supporters that they are eating Big Macs while their asses are between 2 slices of white bread. And they would believe them!
tubeinaredcircle 1 year ago
two words... BITCH SLAPPED!
hellfireyoutoob 1 year ago
In about 4 or 5 years, this is going to make a great ass movie on one the biggest scandals in U.S. history. I was in fuckin high school thinking "Why the fuck our we going to IRAQ". when high schoolers are saying that, you know there was something wrong in the beginning. Im glade this is finally starting to unravel
numerical25 1 year ago 4
Bill Kristol is a true terror warrior. Thanks to patriots like him the iraqis and afghanistanis are free from the grips of their terrorist dictators. We didn't find the weapons of mass destruction becasue osama gave them to Iran (our next stop on the terror ass kicking tour) and to al ciada sleeper cells around America who are waiting for a ron paul presidency to strike. It costed more to deliver freedom then Bill thought, but without his great ideas millions of more people might have died.
tolerantrobbob 1 year ago
@tolerantrobbob Borrowing trillions to play global police is being a fake conservative.
Are you posing as a GOP hack to make them look like idiots on purpose or are you truly this much of an idiot?
And I'm sure many tea party people don't agree with your position either. The first thing they're gonna ask is "how are we going to pay for this?"
Trollmaster21 1 year ago
Protecting America from radical islamofascistnazicommunist terrorists is the conservative thing to do. When they start dropping suitcase icbm thermonuclear dirty bombs (like iran is working on plus the nucks they got from Iraq) their going to deploy their nucks as soon as ron paul gives his code words during a pro-terrorist speech on the house floor. Also Most tea partiers are terror ass kickers like me, the beatiful and lovely and intelligent sarah palin and the real reaganity Dick Cheney.
tolerantrobbob 1 year ago
@tolerantrobbob you are a moron. You don't even know what an icbm is. How the is a suticase an ICBM?
conservobot 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Cink is a Soros prostitute who pushes the fake left/right paradigm.
Both fake left and fake right SUPPORT THE WAR 100%.
Cink boss Soros loves the war so does the Clintons and all the other DEMS who control THE WHITE HOUSE, THE COURTS, and THE CONGRESS.
DEMS LOVE KILLING BROWN PEOPLE.
airborne373 1 year ago
Okay, regarding the Clintons, it might be true to a very small degree. However, Bush Jr. loved war 100 percent in his administration which supported violence in Iraq which ended up having terrible repercussions on the rest of the world.
I'm not sure I understand your stupid remark about "brown people." If you mean Afrian-American, then your statemnent isn't true. Lyndon Johnson, who is a democrat, supported the civil rights act in the 1960s. Stop being an idiot, airborne.
mortalhellion 1 year ago 4
mort- Of course puppet Bush is for the war so does puppet Obama. That's the fake left/right paradigm.
As far as "Brown People" you did not know Aabs have brown skin? The frauds on the left have not made a peep since they have a brown man in The White House.
Your willful ignorance is proof of that.
airborne373 1 year ago
airborne373: Ahh, willful ignorance will kindly describe your racist behavior towards "Aabs" (?).
Racism comes from deep down ignorance that can corrected through education. Some (like Hitler) cannot be corrected.
However, there is still hope for you! You can educate yourself by saying Arab instead of saying, "Brown people." Go head. It isn't hard.
Many self-identify as Arab rarely do so on their own.
mortalhellion 1 year ago
mort- Are you intellectually a child?
I want the these un-declared, un-Constitutional wars to end now and have our Armed Forces returned home to a welcoming nation.
I know 1 million to 1.3 million Iraqi's have been killed in these wars you liberals love so much. And you call me a racist for this?
You care about being PC, I care about the millions of dead brown people.
airborne373 1 year ago
Dear airborne idiot,
Your boyfriends Bush Jr.. Cheney and Rummy were all part of the declared war on Iraq. Obama has nothing to do with being unconstitutional and undelared. Your lovers Bush Jr. and co. did.
I'm getting a tired of your bullshit. Many of the so called "brown people," as you so lovingly state, are also American citizens as well. I don't understand how you can connect the Iraq war with being "racist." I'm referring to your dumb statements of "brown people." Knock if off.
mortalhellion 1 year ago
mort- Are you 11 years old?
You act as if you get your understanding of geo-politics from Saturday cartoons.
I have no affiliation with Bush, Cheney or Rummy. In fact they are puppets of the same group(s) as Obama. Wake up.
P.S. Stop supporting the war. But that is my point where is the anti-war left? It's silent because Barak is pro war.
airborne373 1 year ago
The American government is evil and the American people are fat, worthless, spineless loosers. They don't have the ability to tell truth from lies. A large majority of them are un-educated idiots who actually take pride in being stupid...it's quite sad really.
UGOTDAJACK 1 year ago
i'm fuckin' done. Can't watch politics no more.
xaoseph 1 year ago
"I could use the money!"
This is perfect! :D :D :D
coosoorlog 1 year ago
The gay guy in this video creeps me out
Rocky32084 1 year ago
One tenth? Hmmm, stimulus bill = $787billion. Cost of Iraq War = $704billion. On my planet, thats not quite one-tenth.
eirefrance 1 year ago
"he knows he's lying"
debaser71 1 year ago 2
Carl Rove didn't get anything wrong... he just outright lies ! ! !
luchpockets 1 year ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
kindweed 1 year ago
Sadam got the "WMD" he used on the Kurds from America.
MendingMedia 1 year ago 2
the advert runs and the video doesnt LOL
personage2007 1 year ago
KrptoSodium:
We're talking about Iraq, not the Mujahideen in Afghanistan.
People love to forget this, but it was Jimmy Carter who gave Saddam those weapons, a supposed "anti-war liberal" (laugh) who greenlighted the Iran-Iraq War which killed 5x more than the liberation of Iraq did.
F33bs 1 year ago
F33bs: After reading more of your posts, I have some more clean up to do. Between 1982-1983 (Reagan's first term) the United States smuggled howitzers, helicopters, bombs and weapons to Iraq through third party countries. In 1983 Reagan himself asked Italy's Prime Minister to send Iraq weapons. In December of that year Rumsfeld when to Iraq to reestablish diplomatic ties. In 1986, American intelligence sent satellite images and weapon calibration methods to Iraq. All Carter's fault huh?
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
Yes, thank you JamaicanJasta for the history lesson. I am well aware of the war of 1812. However, when looking at the agreement in the treaty, the US came out wayyyyyyy more on top than Great Britain. Therefore, most historians consider, (such as myself) that the US indeed were the victors in the war of 1812.
houstonrockets616 1 year ago
houstonrockets616: Well let's look at the agreement to see who really ended up on top huh? The original prewar American complaints of Indian raids, British impressment (you know what I mean by this right?) and blockades (stopping trade with Napoleonic Europe) were not addressed at all in the Treaty of Ghent. There were no territorial gains from Britain, in fact nothing that America had complained about was dealt with in the treaty. The only thing that happened was a cessation of hostilities.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
houstonrockets616: You are calling yourself a historian, something I'm not going to debate, but you incorrectly reference the Treaty of Ghent and the consequences of the War of 1812. I mean, the treaty was the definition of "status quo ante bellum" and you're here claiming it was lopsided in favor of America, no it was not. Britain broke international law with several practices before the war and none of that was addressed. Did you actually study that war, or are you making it up?
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
It was lopsided in America's favor... however that is a subjective case, and i tend to view it as such. Maybe you should do a little more research of your own before you try to push your so called "facts" onto someone with as much education in the US history field as myself. Britain may have broke those laws, yet the Treaty before the battle of New Orleans WAS in the American's favor. Review the treaty, and then come back and talk to me. Thanks, have a nice day.
houstonrockets616 1 year ago
houstonrockets616: Seeing as how I actually read the original document before commenting, I suggest you READ the treaty. For all the education you claim to have in U.S. History, your syntax errors and historical omissions make me believe otherwise.
The terms of the treaty are used as an example of "status quo ante bellum" in high school. Something that a world class historian such as yourself should know. Yet your lack of knowledge on this topic is very apparent.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
houstonrockets616: You don't even know what laws Britain violated, nor do you know why the United States declared war. Don't take your ignorance on this topic and make up history. The Treaty of Ghent set the borders back to pre-war status, the British never returned the slaves they captured and the impressment issue was never addressed.
Here read the actual document champ: avalon. law . yale . edu / 19th_century / ghent. asp
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
Am I a Reaganite? What have I said that could be construed as anywhere close to Reaganism? Can you quote me?
No. You can't.
I don't play this type of game, buddy. You wanna argue against a stereotype and figment of your imagination, go ahead. I won't stop you.
However I'm not going to defend or even discuss positions I've never taken, especially about Reagan, who I think was an idiot, a clown and who committed treason by financing terrorists in Nicaragua as well as Iraq.
F33bs 1 year ago
F33bs: I mentioned Reagan because when the topic of funding third world dictators came up all you seem to mention is "Jimmy Carter did X, Y, Z". So yes you appear to be a Reaganite because you're missing the point, AMERICAN FOREIGN POLICY failed these last 30 years. It wasn't one political party or another, it was a pattern of bad decisions made at all levels of government, which chose expediency over certainty. I hope that's something you can agree with, otherwise I don't know what to say.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
Great, you mentioned Reagan and couldn't quote me. Now stop mentioning him. Because I don't like him, at all.
See the post where I stipulated the fact that I'm a liberal, registered Democrat, supporter of Obama, intern at Organizing For America and committed leftist.
Now I think this is enough to cement my anti-Reagan credentials, no?
My point about Carter is that liberals give him a free pass, and voila, what do you know, I brought it up in a thread where I'm arguing with liberals.
F33bs 1 year ago
F33bs: Well, it really didn't matter to me whether you were a liberal/conservative/whatever I'm really here to discuss the points. I say that because titles like that lead to people making assumptions on policy preferences, which don't always end up being true.
I actually agree with the Carter comment, but it annoys me when people try to parse American policy in that region by president, when it's been fairly consistent for 3-4 decades.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
"we (the United States) have a habit of supporting"
I don't remember voting to support Saddam. You mistake the CIA for "America."
In my opinion, the CIA ought to be caged shut and demolished tomorrow for precisely that reason.
However which is the right thing to do, get off your ass and pressure your congressman not to support the CIA, or sit on your ass in front of Olbermann and act like you are some anti-war rebel while you down a Mr. Pibb and text your friends?
Give me a break.
F33bs 1 year ago
F33bs: It's funny how you assume what I have and have not done. I regularly call and write my representatives regarding issues. You also assume I watch cable news. In fact your whole post was one terrible assumption. And yes, you did vote to support Saddam if you voted for Reagan in the 1980s, as HIS appointees were involved with supporting Saddam. Here's my assumption for you, stop eating those pork rinds, they're causing you to break out, wash your face and put on a shirt.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
Here Here!!
Unfortunately the CIA realized a long time ago that if they funded themselves (Iran/Contra, endless front companies, Afghan opium etc. etc.) that they could become over unity.
I hope it's not true but I believe (opinion) that even if we "demolished" it today, we would need to ensure that the ashes were cast to the sea for many years to come. You can't just demolish something that took so many years and lives to create.
Good thoughts though. Keep it up.
Junk4Q2 1 year ago
You can't disentangle the CIA from the US. If you could do that, there would not be any responsibility left. So far, Americans have not gotten off their asses, so they silently agree to the practices of the CIA.
BTW.: I'd like to add Sakashwili of Georgia to the list above. He is like a miniature Saddam. And he also got a lot of support from the Republicans.
TheDudefromSomewhere 1 year ago
Just read the history of the Iran/Iraq War and you will see how the US and other countries aided/supplied Iraq in building up its arsenal on WMD's which Saddam in turn ended up using on his own people (kurds) as well as Iranians.
Traveler2112 1 year ago
Correct. We supplied from Ft. Detrick. MD.
We have receipts to prove it. To the Iraqi ministry of education. Under the guise of research. We also gave the green light for him to invade Kuwait. Then we have the further galvanization of middle easterners "being bad" from the anthrax attacks, be headings, acid attacks...
Read history not selected history.
All these things came to pass because history is selected not learned.
Historically history has been revised.
Read history not selections.
Junk4Q2 1 year ago
American will NEVER forget the fact that we were LIED into a war! We were lied into believing that the Iraq war was a necessary response to 9/11!Our fears and tragedy was used as a platform for mass-murdering...not to mention in the name of "FREEDOM"!Bush,Rove and company are the REASON why 4000+ American soldiers are DEAD! Instead of focusing on Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, the OIL in the middle-east was more valuable than the blood of an American soldier! Shame on you Rove and all the NEO-CONS
freakyfarooq 1 year ago 7
Not to mention America lost 4000+ American soldiers...more American deaths than in 9/11! The civilian death toll in Iraq is off-the-charts! today...pretty much everyday there is a road-side bomb in Iraq! Did this happen when Saddam was the head?There is no denying Saddam was demented,there are thousands other leaders in countries who are demented!Why didn't Bush help Zimbabwe or Rwanda by sending military to topple the leader??The answer lies in the name of a corporation...HALIBURTON!
freakyfarooq 1 year ago 3
When we went into Iraq, there were already more Afghani civilians dead by our hands than the deaths of 9/11....
I wish we cared about other people :(
Zander73 1 year ago
It was obvious that Iraq DID NOT have weapons of mass destruction! The fear propaganda in UN with "hand-made" computer graphics showing "evidence" of WMDs was condemned by majority of the countries! The argument that "it got rid of saddam" is just despicable in the eyes that the ENTIRE war was perpetuated on the premise of WMDs and how Iraq was a THREAT and had a hand in 9/11! And don't give us the bullshit of "the ingredients were present"!Well...why didn't we attack North Korea?Why IRAQ?
freakyfarooq 1 year ago 4
@CavemanSynthesizer
I've got a friendly multiple-choice question for you:
Which benefits the economy of Iraq more?
A) National resources owned by a fascist, genocidal crime family, which are burned and looted at random?
B) National resources that the Iraqi people can actually have a hand in using, and working for, and unionizing over?
Gasp! Cognitive dissonance! Plug the hole with double-speak before thoughts start occurring!
F33bs 1 year ago
So the only two choices were to leave Iraqs oil in the hands of Saddam, or to steal it for ourselves?
How about a third option where the inherited wealth of Iraq's people DOESN'T get sold off at discount prices to foreign corporations?
CavemanSynthesizer 1 year ago
No because we didn't "steal it for ourselves," and you have not one fact or source that proves that.
That's the main difference between the two choices. Adding propaganda to the mix just makes you look stupid, and uninformed.
Foreign companies bring in huge amounts of wealth, and are a proven tool in lifting poverty, provided Iraqi's Parliament can stave off US hegemony (which is a valid concern).
Once again, the issue is complex, and it can't be reduced to "Waah! Bush bad!"
F33bs 1 year ago
You shouldn't talk to your elders like that., sonny boy. You would have been 12 at the time, and you clearly don't know what you're talking about now, so who knows what you were like then.
George W. Bush never presented any actual evidence. It was all found to be untrue, and it's not like nobody noticed BEFORE we declared war. The Niger Uranium lie was debunked. The Sadaam Osama link was debunked.
Heck Bush started his war without UN approval so that he could preempt the UN inspector report
CavemanSynthesizer 1 year ago
Read the SSCI.
OlimDeus 1 year ago
The SSCI concluded that "repeatedly presented intelligence as fact when in reality it was unsubstantiated, contradicted, or even non-existent. As a result, the American people were led to believe that the threat from Iraq was much greater than actually existed.
My question is how do you pass on 'unsubstantiated, contradicted' intelligence without it being deliberate deception?
Interesting to see how a congressional whitewash becomes part of history and the truth slips down the memory hole.
CavemanSynthesizer 1 year ago
@OlimDeus
Get over yourself. I have read it.
It does not change ANY false pretenses for starting the war, the lies our own president told us, the fact that Bush knew there were NO WMDs in Iraq, the fact that the yellowcake had been sealed legally 12 miles from Baghdad, was well known about when we went in the first time, was not weapons grade, had not been touched since 1991, along with the fact that Iraq had NO means to implement it since they lacked nuclear facilities after Operation Opera.
smaugfrost 1 year ago
It was all supposition and invention by neo-con hawks. They wanted to de-nationalize Iraqi oil, and it wasn't just about deposing Saddam, or else Iraqi oil would still be managed by the Iraqi government.
They wrote a lot of this down in a little thing called the PNAC "white-paper." Apparently Dick Cheney brought maps of Iraq to his secret energy meetings as well.
They're robber barons who don't believe in the public good, so why should they believe in it for Iraqis?
Goodbye! Stay in school!
CavemanSynthesizer 1 year ago
P.S. 63% of Iraqis want Iraq state-run companies to develop oil fields and not foreign oil companies.
CavemanSynthesizer 1 year ago
The democratic party is in disarray.
dedebiren 1 year ago
not really. Its just bigger, more diverse and less unified than the republicans.
Thats why they win. They chant in unison until their talking points become the headlines.
Zander73 1 year ago
"1,000,000 deaths"
More propaganda. There haven't even been 1,000,000 violent deaths in Iraq.
Iraq Body Count has around 90,000 and they use actual, verifiable methods of finding out.
Regardless, 95% of those are caused by terrorist attacks, not the Coalition.
F33bs 1 year ago
Deaths =/= Violent deaths.
No, but nice statistic. I love how you pulled it out your ass. The majority of those deaths were caused by lack of infrastructure, or health care due to the invasion.
CapitalistOverlord 1 year ago
Death happens in war, sweetheart.
What else do you think occurs? It's horrible, yes, and it may seem unnecessary, but you also don't know what it is like living under a dictator.
It's easy for you, as a 14 year old whose lived in relative safety in the US, who bashes capitalism while living off the teat of 3rd world labor.
But there is a world outside of Louisiana full of problems that can't be reduced to petty polar politics, and you might be forced to make hard decisions as in Iraq.
F33bs 1 year ago
F33bs: Your ex post facto justifications don't make those families feel better about those deaths. In fact, your argument sounds VERY familiar to those made by the very people we're fighting. Again name calling and taunts detracts from what you're trying to say, even if I was inclined to share your world view, I'd say it was for the wrong reasons. Yes 'petty polar politics' are unable to solve world issues, but neither are unilateral actions and hasty foreign policy.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
Unilateralism would have worked wonders in Rwanda or Darfur or the Congo.
Don't make the mistake of assuming buzzwords like "unilateral" are easy ways to win a dispute axiomatically.
I actually agree with the "hasty foreign policy" aspect, since I think the war was mishandled from the very beginning.
That doesn't mean it wasn't morally justified.
F33bs 1 year ago
F33bs: Never claimed to 'win a dispute' here, I used the word as it was an appropriate way to describe the example I was using. Also, "moral justification" is something I know that you know is a very slippery slope. This is because a set of morals honestly varies between person to person and varies greatly between cultures. If we're speaking morally, then we shouldn't associate with countries like Saudi Arabia who oppresses its people under state sponsored dogma.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
Syntax errors? Are you blind? Just take a good look around, to see where you are standing right now.. ITS FUCKING YOUTUBE! Well... excuse the hell out of me for my "syntax errors." I never claimed to be a world class historian of the matter... which give me the insinuation that you are lacking in the comprehension field. Something a historian CAN NEVER be insufficient in. Maybe I will have to re new your hooked on phonics subscription. If you really want to discuss the war, do so. but no more BS
houstonrockets616 1 year ago
houstonrockets616: Ignoring your logical fallacies for just a second, I did discuss the war. In fact, I listed FACTS not opinions, and I gave you a link to the complete treaty. Comprehension is only relevant in your case as you've claimed to read this document, yet you make up that America ended up 'WAYYYY AHEAD'. Again read the actual document and see what happened. Look at documents from New England during the blockade, in fact what I'm saying to you is READ MORE, SPOUT LESS GARBAGE.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
houstonrockets616: Honestly, I can't say this is a discussion because you haven't even bothered to read the source material. While the course of history is subjective, the facts are not. Objectively, what did America gain from Britain? Britain violated America's neutral right to trade, and this was not solved by the Treaty of Ghent. Only the end of the First Napoleon War solved as a by-product. The territory America gained in Canada was returned in the Treaty.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
F33bs: I guess to encapsulate what I'm saying, I feel the Iraq War (with as many positive outcomes for both the Iraqi people and our national security as it has provided) just represents an overt version of our actions in the last two decades. Yes it's nice to export freedom, liberty and such, yet the pattern of behavior hasn't changed. Geo-politically, we want a strong Iraq to counter the influence of Iran. For those same reason we bolster Israel and Saudi Arabia in the region.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
F33bs: (continuation of my last post) There's nothing WRONG for wanting to have that security of interests (going back even into the early 1970s with the Twin Pillars policy) in that region, but to claim the motivate was purely altruistic is short-sighted. Yes a people have been freed from a brutal dictator, but that was not the driving force. As you aptly listed with other example nations, "moral justification" isn't always enough.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
F33bs: Hasty foreign policy equals supporting the dictator of the week because you want to stand them up against Anti-American Country #21, or invading a nation without having SOME concrete post-military objectives other than catch phrases like "Beacon of Freedom in the Middle East". It's lazy thinking that leads you down this path.
JamaicanJasta 1 year ago
The death doesn't have to happen to innocent people, 'sweet heart'. They may no longer be living under a dictator, but they're still living under harsh conditions. What's good about democracy, when the candidates don't care about you?
Oh lord, really? I 'suck the teat of third world labor'? My clothes were made in a union factory in the US, my computer runs Linux, not Windows (As Microsoft uses third world labor), and just about everything else I buy is from the US.
CapitalistOverlord 1 year ago
Also, we still have that whole million deaths we need to talk about.
Iraq, and for that matter the whole of the middle east, is an extremely hostile and increasingly unstable place. We can't fix their problems by assassinating the dictator, who gave the citizens infrastructure and health care, then destroying everything in the area.
They have 'democracy' now. It's time to leave.
CapitalistOverlord 1 year ago
Thank God for people like you, wateryskipper.
Sometimes when I think about having to support a war as unpopular as Iraq and argue against all my peers on the left, I remember just who has the intellectual and moral high-ground here, and it's me.
You help exemplify the reason for the struggle, if I may say so, and you make it clear which side is really worth fighting for, regardless of mob opinion.
F33bs 1 year ago
How old were you when the war in Iraq started?
sweetriverbanks1 1 year ago