Posted on 06/30/2005 5:47:29 PM PDT by WaveMan
This is for all the Libs who can't accept the fact that we ARE in Iraq because of 9/11 and can't somehow correlate the two are one in the same.
I know this is hard for your pea-sized brains to comprehend and that GWB speaks in a language which is obviously foreign to you but just following me on this one.
"...We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them."
GWB 9/11/01
"...America and our friends and allies join with all those who want peace and security in the world, and we stand together to win the war against terrorism."
GWB 9/11/01
"...So we're determined to fight this evil, and fight until we're rid of it. We will not wait for the authors of mass murder to gain the weapons of mass destruction. We act now, because we must lift this dark threat from our age and save generations to come."
GWB 11/6/01
"...Iraq continues to flaunt its hostility toward America and to support terror. The Iraqi regime has plotted to develop anthrax, and nerve gas, and nuclear weapons for over a decade. This is a regime that has already used poison gas to murder thousands of its own citizens -- leaving the bodies of mothers huddled over their dead children. This is a regime that agreed to international inspections -- then kicked out the inspectors. This is a regime that has something to hide from the civilized world.
States like these, and their terrorist allies, constitute an axis of evil, arming to threaten the peace of the world. By seeking weapons of mass destruction, these regimes pose a grave and growing danger. They could provide these arms to terrorists, giving them the means to match their hatred. They could attack our allies or attempt to blackmail the United States. In any of these cases, the price of indifference would be catastrophic."
GWB 2002 State of the Union Address
"...Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists, and every government that supports them."
"...Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global reach has been found, stopped and defeated."
"...Americans should not expect one battle, but a lengthy campaign, unlike any other we have ever seen. It may include dramatic strikes, visible on TV, and covert operations, secret even in success. We will starve terrorists of funding, turn them one against another, drive them from place to place, until there is no refuge or no rest. And we will pursue nations that provide aid or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States as a hostile regime."
GWB 9/20/2001
So there you have it - any rational-thinking (I know, that doesn't include you libs) who read those statements can clearly see that BECAUSE of 9/11 we ARE in Iraq - after all, ALL INTELLIGENCE (which is something you guys severely lack), pointed to the fact that Saddam either had or was seeking WMD's - not discounting that fact that he himself was a WMD and was a known sponsor of terrorists.
"Oh, but GWB Lied about WMD's and therefore we are in Iraq illegally" - Oh really? So were the following people who ALSO SAID THE SAME THING all Liars?
"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line." - President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998
"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program." - President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998
"Iraq is a long way from [here], but what happens there matters a great deal here. For the risks that the leaders of a rogue state will use nuclear, chemical or biological weapons against us or our allies is the greatest security threat we face." - Madeline Albright, Feb 18, 1998
"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983." - Sandy Berger, Clinton National Security Adviser, Feb, 18, 1998
"We urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs." - Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998
"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process." - Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998
"Hussein has ... chosen to spend his money on building weapons of mass destruction and palaces for his cronies." - Madeline Albright, Clinton Secretary of State, Nov. 10, 1999
"There is no doubt that ... Saddam Hussein has invigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies." - Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, December 5, 2001
"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandated of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them." - Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002
"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power." - Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002
"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seeking and developing weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002
"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..." - Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002
"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force-- if necessary-- to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002
"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five year .. We also should remember we have always underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002
"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do" - Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002
"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members .. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons." - Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002
"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction." - Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL), Dec. 8, 2002
"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation ... And now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ..." - Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
Of course you can’t call the leaders of YOUR party liars because you’ve politicized the hell out of this war – you have no stomach for war and your very essence is that of a candy-ass. You are an Oprahfied, Sissified, Wussified, Donahued, Candified, Don’t hit back, Brain-washed idiot. It’s okay, however, because admitting that is the first step to recovery.
Now I know all you dope-smokin' libs would all prefer to sit around and hold hands with the U.N., Saddam and other evil regimes and sing Kum By Ya - but it doesn't work that way.
I'm sorry to offend your stupid way of thinking (okay, not really sorry), but you CANNOT be rational with evil! - You either destroy it or it'll come back to destroy you.
I'm glad we're fighting the terrorists in the streets of Iraq - isn't that better than having to fight them on the streets of whatever city you happen to live in?
It's time you tards GET OVER YOURSELVES and wake up to what's really going on in this world - stand BEHIND our Troops (Really, when's the last time you went up to one and shook their hand, hugged them or bought their coffee/dinner/whatever) which DOES include supporting their COMMANDER-IN-Chief.
You cannot support one without supporting the other.
If you want this vanity to address liberals, you've come to the wrong place.
Some people will never get it no matter how large of a club or how many time you hit them. They just seem to get dumber by the minute.
See, how wondrous is the spell-checker!
Much better.
Didn't you just post this a little while ago?
Great post! Semper Fi! Ooorahhhh...get some!
"...We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them."
I wonder if Musharraf knows this.
I did, however, the admin didn't like my use of the word retard ...:)
As nonsensical as blaming Roosevelt if he were to mention US soldiers fighting Germans in North Africa when we were attacked by Japan in Hawaii. D'UH....
A) I see that someone took exception to your use of the term "retard."
B) You're preaching to the choir-- and pretty ineffectively. [Calling names-- fie!]
Some retard must have hit the abuse button.
To me libs are retarded, so the term fit... but I respect the admins of this site...
I realize this may be a bit of "preaching to the choir" but I felt it'd be a good resource to use for any libs you may encounter... :)
Golly, once you acknowledge that Iraq and terrorism ARE connected, you then immediately have to ask, "What did Willie know and when did he know it?"
Libs ''choose'' not to get it. I think the other alternative ''to attack your attacker before he has a chance to kill you'' is something they cannot tolerate. They don't have the stomach for it. And as for their stupidity, it's scary how they think. One lib told me...''We should only attack the people that attacked us on 911 and they all committed suicide in those planes. So we should have done nothing after that.!'' Thats how they think folks!
"If you want this vanity to address liberals, you've come to the wrong place."
Hi Coop, perhaps WaveMan did post this at sites such as the DU and was just sharing it with us as well? What say you, WaveMan? If you did post it there, I'd be interested to know what their reaction was. I won't hold my breath. Haven't met a liberal yet that has an ounce of commonsense.
You can't really call that thinking...can you?
Everyone thought Saddam was a threat, and Congress passed a resolution in 2002 advocating the use of force - voted for by some of the Democratic whiners of today. Democratic politicians have since discovered that their Democratic constituents think Bush is Hitler and ought to be impeached, and that they can score political points over people getting blown up in Iraq.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.