Posted on 03/24/2013 9:21:43 PM PDT by MinorityRepublican
Losing two national elections in a row isn’t bad!?! Governors? Like who? The fat-ass, Lou-Costello-look-a-like f’ing RINO Christie? Jeb Bush? Forget it. Either of those two become our candidate and we’re sunk before we even started.
savaging the civilized often does work
Well 75% of people everywhere are homosexual, you know! And they make better parents than heterosexuals, because the American Pediatric Association said so!
After the Petraeus troop surge, Iraq was basically over. Obama could have started to make long-term foreign oil issues irrelevant with a semi-sensible (domestic drilling) energy policy. He failed. That's far worse, over the long haul, than the costs of Iraq.
Furthermore, one can only imagine how much less stable the Gulf region would be today, with a post-sanctions Baathist regime still in control of Iraq. By now, Uday or Qusay would be ruling it. They'd have plenty of cash to purchase a nuclear warhead or 10 from any number of rogue regimes, and mount them on Scuds.
It takes a great revisionist to say that the 'Rats aren't largely responsible for America's foreign policy decline. Bush 41 lost re-election, in part, by failing to oust Saddam in Gulf War I. That led to the muddled Clinton foreign policy (e.g. Mogadishu, Bosnia & Kosovo).
The 1990s were marked by neglicence and dereliction of duty, in the face of Saddam, Iran, Arafat, and AlQaeda alike. That gave us 9-11 and all the ensuing messes.
Nah, I’ll be the other one to agree. Iraq was a war that should not have been fought. The party is in trouble although it is not Iraq that is the problem.
It is demographics!
Bush 41 won 400 EV’s winning 60 % of the white vote. Romney won 60% of the white vote and won 200 EV’s.
Without outreach to people of color the party will die. It is actually pretty simple.
Probably a lot easier than they can recover from having pieces of crap like you claiming to be one of them, Peggy.
Iraq may well have more oil than Saudi Arabia. It’s everywhere in that country, percolating out of the ground in areas not even identified as oil deposits.
The MSM has been on a ‘Iraq war bad’ meme the past two weeks and now we know why -to slime the Repubs for current failure and forfeiture of America’s victory.
Did not know the Republican Party was in Iraq.
But if the issue is politics the Republican Party can not survive another election if they run democrat lite candidates. Run a CONSERVATIVE or get lost.................
Spot on.
The only possible justification was for the Roach Motel effect on jihadis, but the reality is that they breed them by the millions. And Bush’s “peaceful, friendly Islam” nonsense set us back on really dealing with the root issues 50 years.
Iraq is not the problem the LIBERALS and moderates who want to please those who will never vote for them, ARE! romeny, greenburg, snowe, collins, grahamnesty, mcnasty, to name a few. Add rove to the list btw.
The more they keep poking at us, the more we dig in. I’m done with their “agenda”. If they think that the gay rights activist’s money, the pro-amnesty money is going to make them win elections in the future they are sadly mistaken. A lie is a lie no matter how you disguise it. They have young people believing that the Gay agenda is the number 1 topic in this country. When in reality it is 2.8% of the population, but we have to sacrifice our morals for them.
When did a social issue trump National Security? We are watching it right now. The GOP is done as we know it.
As far as Iraq, I like many supported it in the beginning. What it morphed into I was against. Nation building never ends well as time goes on. Lost souls and hurt bodies left in it’s wake.
Yes, and I distinctly remember GWB boasting that his Iraq would “not be another Vietnam.”
Iraq was a waste. Sorta like Vietnam.
We had no business in either Vietnam or Iraq in the first place. Both of these countries were Europe’s threat and problem...not ours.
In both wars (and including Afghanistan) we simply wasted American life to accomplish absolutely nothing! NOTHING!
Bingo:
The Iraq war isn’t killing the party, It’s progressive liberal leaning leadership is killing it.
She’s lost her mind.
My wake-up call was late 2006 after the GOP lost the congress Bush suddenly announces that his endless ‘stay the course’ strategy wasnt working and starts demanding that the new Dem congress fund a surge, after 2 years of deteriorating conditions with Bush and Rummy assuring us that all was well.
At that stage I know an anchor was around the GOPs neck and Dems have been trusted more than the GOP on national security ever since.
Now Kerry's begging Iraqis to now allow Iran to fly over.
We got nothing for all those wasted lives and $$$.
"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
"[W]e 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 mandate 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 Sadaam 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 Sadaam 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 years ... 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 calculating America’s response to his continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein’s with weapons of mass destruction is real ..."
- Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003
However, I disagree strenuously with the moniker of the Left, "Bush's War". The State Run Media has seen fit to erase the role of the Dems - see post #38. Quite differently than Syria, Lybia, Eqypt, etc. President Bush (and Colin Powell) sought and obtained the Constitutionally-required Congressional approval for the war.
Careful - that's the kind of talk that got Ron Paul and others labeled "crazy" around here.
It seems that if you don't want to routinely use the military as a "global force for good" you aren't a real American. And, strangely, that's exactly what the Left thinks about using Federal police power domestically....
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.