C'mon Dari. Was Bush lying or not? I can link to speech after speech that includes liberation as a reason for going to war. But according to you, that was just to appease the liberals. So he was lying, right?
Originally posted by: Dari
Originally posted by: Bowfinger
According to the Bush-lite and his YABAs, we invaded Iraq for humanitarian reasons, to "liberate" the Iraqis, and not because of the WMDs that weren't. These same people say we don't need more people in Iraq, in spite of multiple real generals who say we do, because it costs to much. So are you saying that Bush and his loyal minions are liberals?
I am so confused.
No one went to Iraq for humanitarian reasons. Humanitarian reasoning was used to satiate the liberals in this country. We went into iraq because Hussein was a threat to the United States (16 Article VII UN resolutions come to mind) and the neighborhood of which the United States has strategic interests.
This is just because Dari said I took his statement out of context. Is this better Dari?
Liberation is not a humanitarian reason. Liberating Iraq was quite obvious since leaving Hussein in the first time around did not solve the problem. Now, Bush stating that we are going into Iraq because he was killing his own people would've been a humanitarian reason. Get that straight.
EDIT: And don't forget what satiate means. Remember back after 9/11, when liberals were absolutely against the war in Afghanistan. As disgusted as he was about giving other reasonings, Bush eventually mentioned that the Taliban was a bad and harsh regime (against their own people). Some liberals came around, but the mass majority were still against the war. It's the same thing here. After the fabled "peace dividend" that Clinton touted as an excuse to cut down the security and intelligence infrastructure, liberals have to be treated like children when discussing serious matter. Now they're angry, refusing to believe reality. They want to return to the fantasy of the 1990s, when America slept under Clinton.
If you want to act like children, you will be treated as such.
Sorry, I must not be understanding you correctly. What exactly are you referring to when you say this...
Humanitarian reasoning was used to satiate the liberals in this country.
What? Ever here the words Operation Iraqi Freedom?
Our cause is just, the security of the nations we serve and the peace of the world. And our mission is clear, to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, to end Saddam Hussein's support for terrorism, and to free the Iraqi people.
The people who serve in the military are giving their best to this country. We have the responsibility to give them our full support as they fight for the liberty of an oppressed people, for the security of the United States, and for the peace of the world.
Like I said earlier, it was an eventuality, not a stated reason for war. Just as with afghanistan, Iraqi freedom was not carried out to free the people of iraq. It was carried out to oust tyrants that had broken international rules and harbored terrorists. You really need to distinguish between stated reasons and eventualities. Bush mentioned the liberation of iraq because he was going to oust hussein. It was not the stated reason.
Now, get back to the topic at hand.
Jesus man! Do the words "Our mission is clear" not mean anything to you?
I think we can add Dari to the 'Black knight' list. (see quote above)
Good night Dari.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter