• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Bush admits he lied about Iraq

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Not trying to threadcrap here but,

1) Bush would never admit he lied about anything.

2) Bush would never admit he ever made a mistake.

 
and our sanctions starved at least half a million iraqi children
Click to expand...
Iraq not buying food but weapons and palaces with the oil-for-food money starved children.

do you blame them for taking the occasional potshot?
Click to expand...
US airplanes arn't full of candy and ramennoodle.
but, no, i can't. because if they'd achieved there aims we'd be quickly invading there country and freeing them.
1) Bush would never admit he lied about anything.

2) Bush would never admit he ever made a mistake.
Click to expand...
Moonie means bush was caught in an intellectually dishonest position.
 
that is another foxnews lie, oil for food was *surprise* another american corporate scam.

bush's invasion of iraq would make saddam blush with the number of dead.

the only thing liberated is more familys from their loved ones.

whoopee! we removed the genocidal us puppet to install a worse one..good job bush!

As you can see the iraqis are falling over themselves to thanks us :roll:
 
i think the hundreds of thousands of dead Kurds and Shiite would disagree, but wtf, right, your statements just make it so easy to be against the evils of war, why don?t I just agree and stop worrying about this whole thinking bit?
 
So, these as far as I see it are the realities that bush has gotten us into,

first you had a us puppet run amok, killed 10.000's of dissidents but kept order pretty much

then you had a invasion and sanctions that combined together killing literally a million or so iraqis, us evil dictator gone country falls into the brink of civil war

same torture, same facilities, but this time the leader isn't even a iraqi national...just a foreign force that can't stand the locals as much as they can't stand them.

death toll? well, you can't really get the scope of that many bodies but ousting saddam in this way was pretty damn stupid..even bush pappy said so.

worth it? not if you are one of the people with killed family members.

Now you have iraqis wishing saddam was still around..and not becasue he was a nice guy either.

bush royally fvcked this up and took the reputation of our fine country along with it.
 
Originally posted by: redhatlinux
THIS IS PURE BULLSH!T. Since I was born in England just after the end of WW2, I would like to remind you dumb asses that 50 million lives were lost in that war !!!!. 15 million alone were Russian. Do you know what its like to have V1 & V2 rockets aimed at your home EVERY F.ing NIGHT. My Father worked at the factory and he designed and built the special timing mechanisms for the British bombs that blew Hitlers butt out of power. GROW UP. ANY leader with any balls at all will never stand by at let a ruthless dictator murder his people. Just in case you have a bad memory, Saddam shot at the US and British planes maintaining the 'no fly zones, north a south of Bagdad, just about daily. Absolute fact, Saddam was in the sights of a 'special sniper', the first time, and the 'coalition' wimped out and said NO. Many Iraqis are pissed because he wasn't killed the first time and they had to suffer more.
Click to expand...


They were "no fly zones" because we didn't want saddam using them to kill his own people. Saddam didn't control those areas. Our planes getting shot at from the ground weren't getting shot at by Saddam's army. That was another stupid excuse they used to get us in there. Think about the REASON why it was a no fly zone!
 
Originally posted by: NeenerNeener
Originally posted by: redhatlinux
THIS IS PURE BULLSH!T. Since I was born in England just after the end of WW2, I would like to remind you dumb asses that 50 million lives were lost in that war !!!!. 15 million alone were Russian. Do you know what its like to have V1 & V2 rockets aimed at your home EVERY F.ing NIGHT. My Father worked at the factory and he designed and built the special timing mechanisms for the British bombs that blew Hitlers butt out of power. GROW UP. ANY leader with any balls at all will never stand by at let a ruthless dictator murder his people. Just in case you have a bad memory, Saddam shot at the US and British planes maintaining the 'no fly zones, north a south of Bagdad, just about daily. Absolute fact, Saddam was in the sights of a 'special sniper', the first time, and the 'coalition' wimped out and said NO. Many Iraqis are pissed because he wasn't killed the first time and they had to suffer more.
Click to expand...


They were "no fly zones" because we didn't want saddam using them to kill his own people. Saddam didn't control those areas. Our planes getting shot at from the ground weren't getting shot at by Saddam's army. That was another stupid excuse they used to get us in there. Think about the REASON why it was a no fly zone!
Click to expand...
It was the space aliens from Area 51?
 
Originally posted by: conehead433
Not trying to threadcrap here but,

1) Bush would never admit he lied about anything.

2) Bush would never admit he ever made a mistake.
Click to expand...

True, but I was happy to for him.
 
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Originally posted by: miketheidiot
Originally posted by: redhatlinux
THIS IS PURE BULLSH!T. Since I was born in England just after the end of WW2, I would like to remind you dumb asses that 50 million lives were lost in that war !!!!. 15 million alone were Russian. Do you know what its like to have V1 & V2 rockets aimed at your home EVERY F.ing NIGHT. My Father worked at the factory and he designed and built the special timing mechanisms for the British bombs that blew Hitlers butt out of power. GROW UP. ANY leader with any balls at all will never stand by at let a ruthless dictator murder his people. Just in case you have a bad memory, Saddam shot at the US and British planes maintaining the 'no fly zones, north a south of Bagdad, just about daily. Absolute fact, Saddam was in the sights of a 'special sniper', the first time, and the 'coalition' wimped out and said NO. Many Iraqis are pissed because he wasn't killed the first time and they had to suffer more.
Click to expand...

whats wrong with iraq defending its soveriegn airspace?
Click to expand...
thanks for proving:
Pacifist propaganda ? boils down to saying that one side is as bad as the other, but [they do not] express impartial disapproval [they do not ] condemn violence as such, but only violence used in defense of western countries.
and in this case in defense of previously mas-murdered curds and Shiites.
Click to expand...

Generalizing is easy. Our brains love to simplify things. I, for one am not a pacifist. I supported Bush's decision to invade Afghanistan. It was when he invaded Iraq that I personally dissented. I'm sure MANY people who you think are "pacifists" are with me on this one. Ya know what? Propaganda can also help those in power to remain in power.

BTW, the Kurds were massacred in the 1980's. Why didn't the U.S. intervene then? Oh yeah, it was because Saddam was an ally who would sell us oil when the jihadists didn't want him to. We eventually ended up flagging his ships carrying oil American, so the Jihadist's wouldn't end up attacking them.

Saddam didn't have sh1t after 1994. Your rationalizations are weak. He didn't attack us, the fundamentalists did. All who are brainwashed, say "I".
 
Besides, the no fly zones were lame anyway..

"According to 1994 and 1996 State Department reports, the creation and military enforcement of no-fly zones have not successfully protected the Iraqi Kurdish and Shi?a populations. The fact that the U.S. and UK routinely allow the Turkish Air Force to conduct bombing raids against Kurdish targets in the northern no-fly zone indicates that there is not a genuine concern about protecting this vulnerable minority. U.S.-UK air strikes have also failed to accurately pinpoint Iraqi military targets. In 1999 alone, UN officials documented 144 civilians killed in the U.S.-UK bombing raids. Enforcement of the no-fly zones is increasingly viewed by many in the U.S. Air Force as both strategically useless and too costly in terms of personnel and funding."

The no-fly zones violated international law and made it possible for Turkey to conduct bombing raids against the Kurds.

Heres a good site.
 
Originally posted by: redhatlinux
THIS IS PURE BULLSH!T. Since I was born in England just after the end of WW2, I would like to remind you dumb asses that 50 million lives were lost in that war !!!!. 15 million alone were Russian. Do you know what its like to have V1 & V2 rockets aimed at your home EVERY F.ing NIGHT. My Father worked at the factory and he designed and built the special timing mechanisms for the British bombs that blew Hitlers butt out of power. GROW UP. ANY leader with any balls at all will never stand by at let a ruthless dictator murder his people. Just in case you have a bad memory, Saddam shot at the US and British planes maintaining the 'no fly zones, north a south of Bagdad, just about daily. Absolute fact, Saddam was in the sights of a 'special sniper', the first time, and the 'coalition' wimped out and said NO. Many Iraqis are pissed because he wasn't killed the first time and they had to suffer more.
Click to expand...


Congratulations on defeating Hitler! How about all the leaders who let genocide go on? Don't pretend you're some sort of humanitarian. Oh yeah. You've got big balls!
 
Daddy knew better.

"To occupy Iraq would instantly shatter our coalition, turning the whole Arab world against us, and make a broken tyrant a latter-day Arab hero. It would have taken us way beyond the imprimatur of international law bestowed by the resolutions of the Security Council, assigning young soldiers to a fruitless hunt for a securely entrenched dictator and condemning them to fight in what would be an unwinnable urban guerilla war. It would only plunge that part of the world into even greater instability and destroy the credibility we were working so hard to reestablish." [emphasis mine-- ed.]."

Link
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
"We went to war because we were attacked, and we are at war today because there are still people out there who want to harm our country and hurt our citizens.
Click to expand...
You know what? I think he may be referring to Afghanistan here not Iraq.

 
lifted from here

it shall be broken down...

a good portion of the middle east - societies with little to no social mobility. you are born poor you die poor, you are born rich, you die rich. these places were breeding ground for american hatred... the poor people were succeptible to "if you suicide bomb this place, your family will be paid and not have to live like they have been" and they were succeptible to all the anti american propoganda.... bush went into iraq because a) he had justification (UN's 17 sanctions)... b) iraq was a good target because it was a pretty educated and literate nation in the middle east not to mention c) lets not forget it was ran by the tyranical dictator hussein[, if u want to refute point c) well i'll leave it at that...

the idea is you break the class structure in place in these countries and establish democracy and a free flow of class structure and mobility, eliminating [the appeal of]hate groups like the taliban and al queda... (the groups who behead people on their television stations)... establishing freedoms in places that didn't once have it.
 
Originally posted by: matstars
lifted from here

it shall be broken down...

a good portion of the middle east - societies with little to no social mobility. you are born poor you die poor, you are born rich, you die rich. these places were breeding ground for american hatred... the poor people were succeptible to "if you suicide bomb this place, your family will be paid and not have to live like they have been" and they were succeptible to all the anti american propoganda.... bush went into iraq because a) he had justification (UN's 17 sanctions)... b) iraq was a good target because it was a pretty educated and literate nation in the middle east not to mention c) lets not forget it was ran by the tyranical dictator hussein[, if u want to refute point c) well i'll leave it at that...

the idea is you break the class structure in place in these countries and establish democracy and a free flow of class structure and mobility, eliminating [the appeal of]hate groups like the taliban and al queda... (the groups who behead people on their television stations)... establishing freedoms in places that didn't once have it.
Click to expand...

Welll.... I agree with the first line..... of your SIG! Go Mets!!!
 
Originally posted by: BBond
Bush is at it again. Repeating the lies that Bush himself renounced.

We've all seen the video and read the quotes. And the Kean Commission investigation CLEARLY found there was absolutely no connection between Iraq and 9/11. Yet on Bush goes like the Everready bunny, lying and lying and lying and lying...

Bush Flatly Declares No Connection Between Saddam and al Qaeda

Bush says US is in Iraq because of attacks on US

I can't understand how even the most ardent Bushie can stand for this.
Click to expand...

They equate their political leaders with their penis.
 
Originally posted by: BBond
Bush is at it again. Repeating the lies that Bush himself renounced.

We've all seen the video and read the quotes. And the Kean Commission investigation CLEARLY found there was absolutely no connection between Iraq and 9/11. Yet on Bush goes like the Everready bunny, lying and lying and lying and lying...

Bush Flatly Declares No Connection Between Saddam and al Qaeda

Bush says US is in Iraq because of attacks on US

I can't understand how even the most ardent Bushie can stand for this.
Click to expand...

"Our troops are fighting these terrorists in Iraq so you will not have to face them here at home."
Click to expand...
bet the iraqies are so pleased to hear that
 
Originally posted by: Moonbeam
Full text from the Whitehouse here.

And check out the other incredible lies in the following from his speech:


"We went to war because we were attacked, and we are at war today because there are still people out there who want to harm our country and hurt our citizens. Some may disagree with my decision to remove Saddam Hussein from power, but all of us can agree that the world's terrorists have now made Iraq a central front in the war on terror. These foreign terrorists violently oppose the rise of a free and democratic Iraq, because they know that when we replace despair and hatred with liberty and hope, they lose their recruiting grounds for terror."

We went to war because we were attacked? No no no no no, don't you remember? We went to war because Saddam Husein had Weapons of Mass Destruction that he didn't have. And we specifically never would have gone to war to remove Saddam Husein. And we know that of 1200 recent 'terrorist' captures only 50 were non-Iraqi. No we have created a monster in Iraq and that monster is Iraqi. We have created the despair and hatred

George Bush is a lying disaster who acted out of animal instincts to which he invents fancy words, and new ones all the time.
Click to expand...

Well, according to GWB, everthing is going according to plan. I wonder how soon they can get the democracy functioning and an army/police force formed? Oh yeah, as long as it takes. In the meantime, the idiot just keeps claiming success, and as Moonbeam points out, make a liar out of himself.

I'm sure the Iraqi's love us for making thier country the "central front on terror". The only problem is terrorists keep assasinating the democratic leaders and the police. Doesn't it seem that these 2 points are at odds with each other? But it's all going according to plan, right?

I also have to wonder if any of the sheeple of this country ever think about the strategic aspect of terrorism. If the terrorists can have sleeper cells in this country, imagine how easy it is for them to infiltrate the Iraqi army, police force, etc. Oh I forgot, we don't care about catching OBL anymore, we're too busy killing the dumb terrorists.

The part that really get's me is that the terrorists will strike this country again in ways we haven't even thought of yet. If we don't have enough support in Iraq by now that our leaders can't give us some type of a timeline, then it's clear to me that things are going badly and that GWB is still lying through his teeth.
 
McCain and Hagel strongly disagree with Bush and Dick "last throes" Cheney about the state of Bush's fiasco in Iraq.

"What I think we should do," McCain told NBC's "Meet the Press," "is wait until we achieve the successes, then celebrate them, rather than predict them. Because too often that prediction is not proven to be true."
Click to expand...

"Things aren't getting better; they're getting worse. The White House is completely disconnected from reality," Hagel tells U.S. News. "It's like they're just making it up as they go along. The reality is that we're losing in Iraq."
Click to expand...
 
follow the money fellas. The war in iraq is about big money, money so big there probably isn't one person on these forums, including myself, that understand the magnitude of profits that are being made by the private sector. No bid contracts are a joke and anybody who thinks they can justify that is fooling themselves. Iraq is also strategically a perfect location to set up shop in the middle east. What i can't stand is our boys getting killed over there for these super wealthy pricks that are making a killing, no pun intended. I was perfectly okay with Afganistan, and we should have concentrated all our efforts there. Instead, we were told Saddam was an "immenent threat" and had WMD then all of sudden we are supposed to forget about all of that and want "democracy for the iraqi people". They must think we are complete f'ing idiots. Man this pisses me off. I supported conservative politics for a long time, but these neo-cons and their penac BS is not where our country needs to go.
 
How sad. If you are among those who are now saying:
1. There was no attack on September 11, 2001.
2. That no planes hit the towers but instead President Bush ordered explosives to be used to destroy the towers.

Then stop reading.

The OP sounds as if they believe #1 and should stop reading.

For everyone else, solely in an attempt to stop the rewriting of history, please continue.

We went to war against terrorists because we were attacked on September 11, 2001. Of course, the mainstream media does not repeatedly show those attacks probably because of their biased agenda.

Saddam Hussein was paying the families of terrorists $25,000 U.S.

Saddam Hussein had, per the official report, links with Osama bin Laden. (For those of you who only listen to one side and don't follow up, the "no direct link" quote is not a lie but rather it is Michael Moored. The no direct link is the conclusion that no direct link was made between Saddam and bin Laden specifically related to the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Saddam helped train, on Iraq soil, terrorists with specific training on how to commandeer commercial aircraft.

Saddam was attempting to purchase nuclear material in order to build additional weapons of mass destruction.

Saddam claimed to have weapons of mass destruction.

British intelligence claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

United States intelligence claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

Jacques Chirac claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

Even Russia and Germany said they believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

President Clinton called for deposing Saddam in 1998. President Bush fulfilled his policy.

France and Germany and possibly Russia were receiving billions of dollars in oil from Saddam. To continue this fine tradition they stalled as long as possible the U.S. from taking action against Iraq.

As for rushing to war, Saddam had 14 years to disarm and defied the U.N. the entire time.

Only when war was eminent does it appear that Saddam ?disarmed? (possibly / probably) by moving the biological, chemical, and nuclear material to Syria or another country. Perhaps it was simply buried as he did with part of his air force.

Now, I know, I?m a right wing radical nut :roll: Of course if you believe that then you are probably very far to the left in the political spectrum. So, how about reading the words of your most cherished President spoken in England and published in a fine much to the left of center newspaper?

http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:6W...raq180303/+clinton+depose+saddam&hl=en

Excerpt:
?In November {2002}, the UN Security Council adopted unanimously Resolution 1441, giving Saddam a "final opportunity" to disarm, after 12 years of defying UN resolutions requiring him to do so.
 
Originally posted by: ExpertNovice
How sad. If you are among those who are now saying:
1. There was no attack on September 11, 2001.
2. That no planes hit the towers but instead President Bush ordered explosives to be used to destroy the towers.

Then stop reading.

The OP sounds as if they believe #1 and should stop reading.

For everyone else, solely in an attempt to stop the rewriting of history, please continue.

We went to war against terrorists because we were attacked on September 11, 2001. Of course, the mainstream media does not repeatedly show those attacks probably because of their biased agenda.

Saddam Hussein was paying the families of terrorists $25,000 U.S.

Saddam Hussein had, per the official report, links with Osama bin Laden. (For those of you who only listen to one side and don't follow up, the "no direct link" quote is not a lie but rather it is Michael Moored. The no direct link is the conclusion that no direct link was made between Saddam and bin Laden specifically related to the September 11, 2001 attacks.

Saddam helped train, on Iraq soil, terrorists with specific training on how to commandeer commercial aircraft.

Saddam was attempting to purchase nuclear material in order to build additional weapons of mass destruction.

Saddam claimed to have weapons of mass destruction.

British intelligence claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

United States intelligence claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

Jacques Chirac claimed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

Even Russia and Germany said they believed Saddam had weapons of mass destruction.

President Clinton called for deposing Saddam in 1998. President Bush fulfilled his policy.

France and Germany and possibly Russia were receiving billions of dollars in oil from Saddam. To continue this fine tradition they stalled as long as possible the U.S. from taking action against Iraq.

As for rushing to war, Saddam had 14 years to disarm and defied the U.N. the entire time.

Only when war was eminent does it appear that Saddam ?disarmed? (possibly / probably) by moving the biological, chemical, and nuclear material to Syria or another country. Perhaps it was simply buried as he did with part of his air force.

Now, I know, I?m a right wing radical nut :roll: Of course if you believe that then you are probably very far to the left in the political spectrum. So, how about reading the words of your most cherished President spoken in England and published in a fine much to the left of center newspaper?

http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:6W...raq180303/+clinton+depose+saddam&hl=en

Excerpt:
?In November {2002}, the UN Security Council adopted unanimously Resolution 1441, giving Saddam a "final opportunity" to disarm, after 12 years of defying UN resolutions requiring him to do so.
Click to expand...

Saddam had 14 years and guess what, he did disarm, NO WMD's. We obviously rushed to war.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top