Hummm...I thought all of the faux terrorist alerts ended with the Bush administration?

YEAH!

And Terrorists Plots can only be Thwarted by Preemptive Invasions!

And Terrorists Plots can only be Thwarted by Preemptive Invasions!

#2 | POSTED BY REDNECKVILLE AT 2009-09-22 03:30 PM | REPLY | FLAG

Perhaps. Anyone who would totally discount the possibility of using preemptive force is a fool.

"Perhaps. Anyone who would totally discount the possibility of using preemptive force is a fool.:"

Possibly true where there is a threat to preempt which wasn't Iraq. All the Bush administration preempted was success in Afghanistan.

Man, obama is not starting the tactics of bush all over again.

Change we can believe in!

wasted vote that was for sure.

Possibly true where there is a threat to preempt which wasn't Iraq.
#4 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2009-09-22 05:06 PM | REPLY | FLAG:

no dispute. the only question remaining is what to do now?

Possibly true where there is a threat to preempt which wasn't Iraq

Iraq had WND's, because we gave them to Saddam back in the 80's, so the threat was real. They are still buried in the sand.

"Iraq had WND's, because we gave them to Saddam back in the 80's, so the threat was real. "

What a pile of shit. If you opened one of those shells, and smeared the contents on somebody, they might cause a really nasty burn. How can something be a WMD if there's no "M" and no "D"?

Regardless, those weren't what we were after, and only a moron would use that as a justification.

Regardless, those weren't what we were after, and only a moron would use that as a justification.

#8 | POSTED BY DANFORTH AT 2009-09-22 06:35 PM | REPLY | FLAG

What, pray tell, do you, sir, believe that we were after? And, by stating that we were after something, are you not admitting that there was justification - even though we ultimately did not find that something? Is it not true that you, and your kind, have been prattling on and on and on and on and on and on about President Bush lying about there being WMD?

Yet, by your very post, you ADMIT that the intentions were true - albeit ultimately misguided. YOU, sir, are inconsistent.

Iraq had WND's, because we gave them to Saddam back in the 80's

Sadfdam was given old copies of the World Nut Daily?

No wonder he was such a fucking nutball.

^_^

America sold arms to both sides of the Iraq/Iran war.

Saddam destroyed his largely useless so-called WMD but did so in secret thinking he was being clever.

Stupidest thing he ever did.

Be Well.

Probably a bad time to book that convention of Muslim arms dealers.

"What, pray tell, do you, sir, believe that we were after? "

Certainly not ten-year old shells buried in the sand by old war bombs. What do YOU think we were after?

"Is it not true that you, and your kind, have been prattling on and on and on and on and on and on about President Bush lying about there being WMD?"

"The British Government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa."

That was a lie, and you --and your kind -- are defending it.

"Yet, by your very post, you ADMIT that the intentions were true - albeit ultimately misguided. YOU, sir, are inconsistent."

And you are a moron. I was never for the invasion and occupation of Iraq. I remember getting ready for Colin Powell's presentation to the UN thinking "this will show them!", and then afterward thinking "that's all we've got?!?"

Turns out I was right. I'm not inconsistent at all. Bush's reason was not my reason.

The libs have yet to answer my #1.

So NOW the terrorists are a real threat since Bush/Cheney are not in office?

BTW - Concerning the massive flooding in Georgia, where the hell is FEMA?

#12 Bullshit!

You are being dumb. You have no idea about the rigors of warfare, or the justification of its use. You are unaware of the dangers lurking just beneath the sand, like a serpent ready to strike down all that is good and wholesome.

You would be a defeatist. You would turn back to leave our Iraqi brothers in the lurch to become some kind of Iranian pawn. You, sir, lack vision and honor.

You would be a defeatist. You would turn back to leave our Iraqi brothers in the lurch to become some kind of Iranian pawn. You, sir, lack vision and honor.

Posted by somoco at 2009-09-22 09:22 PM | Reply

I would say anyone that continues with a failed policy/War/Etc etc is the real coward. Not one that refuses to face reality and THAT reality is the Illegal Iraq War was lost the very second it began. Sorry for that.

Larry

So NOW the terrorists are a real threat since Bush/Cheney are not in office?

#13 | Posted by Beachbuzz

Are you saying that terrorists aren't a threat anymore, now that Bush/Cheney are not in office?

#16

I'm saying when W was in office and terrorist warnings came out, the libs would say they were making shit up. But now that they have THEIR Chimpy in the WH, not a fucking peep.

"I'm saying when W was in office and terrorist warnings came out, the libs would say they were making shit up. But now that they have THEIR Chimpy in the WH, not a fucking peep."

Gee, maybe because Bush was using it for political purposes, and Obama actually caught someone.

Remind us...how many terror warnings before the 2004 elections, and how many after?

Funny how Obama hasn't made a "Heighten State of Awareness" speech and then raised the "Terror threat Level" like the slimeball Dubya did before 2004. I mean really SITP. It was used as a political ploy and that's it. Don't You also find it stupid to announce a supposed threat to a certain activity or place of business publically?? I mean if I were a terrorist and was going to attack the local Dairy Queens for milkshakes don't You think it wise for the people in charge of terorist activities topubically keep their mouths shut so as to keep Me in the dark about them being on to Me?? That was another bullshit thing I never understood. If You know a certain people place or thing was going to be attacked You wouldn't warn the attacker. Bunch of shit it really is.

Larry

I'm saying when W was in office and terrorist warnings came out, the libs would say they were making shit up.

#17 | Posted by Beachbuzz

According to Tom Ridge it's certainly plausible that the Bush administration was making shit up.

Oh and Prag I know a huge run on sentence.

Apparently the responses to #17 were too much for Peachfuzz.