Bush, Rumsfeld Confident Iraq Had Weapons of Mass Destruction

American Forces Press Service ^ | July 10, 2003 | Linda D. Kozaryn

[okie01]

"Don't fall in love with a politician, he'll break your heart every time".

Good advice. And, in particular, never trust a Democrat politician. He'll steal your wallet and screw your family. Every time.

And, usually, they are identifiable by their escort of slimey trolls...

[Burkeman1]

This thing could come apart quickly and its the conservative cause that will be hurt for decades to come.

May already have. Read National Review's article today entitled "Left Turn" (most likely already posted on FR). What NR stops short of saying is that the Iraq war is the reason for much of the leftward drift by Bush.

[Burkeman1]

I think you should go to sleep now.

[jwalsh07]

LOL. You make a fool out of your self and I should sleep it off?

[jwalsh07]

I do believe it fits in your case.

Actually, I believe that shoe fits you Dougy my man.

I asked you about 6 substantive questions on the other thread and you failed to answer a one but lo and behold I find you here selling the same crap.

But you did get Burkeman to buy in so your trolling wasn't a total lost cause.

[Michael Barnes]

Sage advice many on this board need to take before they wrap themselves around Bush in support of what he has done here. This thing could come apart quickly and its the conservative cause that will be hurt for decades to come.

Sage advice you need to take before you wrap yourself around Lee Rodgers in support of what he has to say. The thing came apart very quickly and its the democratic cause that was hurt for decades to come.

See, we had Bin Laden served up on a golden platter. At the time we had leadership that was a failure out of the gates (hint- definition of "is" is?). During Gulf War I (my war), We had leadership that could have finished bizz, but did not.

Were making things right. And I'm sorry you can't see the fact that War is a risky business. A lot of things can come apart. And, for what it's worth, I think it will. Before 04? I dunno, Before '08? I believe so 100%. Bottom line, were in a war. Politics and the ruthless doctrine of winning a war do not mix.

With that said, I'm glad we (right) now have a President that is steps ahead of the "politic-ing" (sp?) of typical Washington. You will recall, Preisdent Bush made numerous references to brining a new tone to Washington?

Guess many have foregotten already....Just my $0.02

[AD from SpringBay]

I don't expect much of anything anymore - regardless of what letter the politician has after his or her name. All I'm saying is that the world is better off without Mr. Saddam in power.

[NJJ]

I think it's safe to assume that if there was a Democrat in the White House, we would still be flying our No-Fly zones, our troops would still be in Kuwait and Turkey and we would still be pumping money down the rat hole with nothing to show for it.

They are currently investigating who didn't do their job on 9/11. If we assume we had heard that something was going to happen, but it turned out the information came from an unreliable source, we should have sat on our asses until we got better information.

At least now, the Democrats are showing it is not safe to trust the country in their hands.

[arete]

I don't expect much of anything anymore - regardless of what letter the politician has after his or her name. All I'm saying is that the world is better off without Mr. Saddam in power.

I can agree with that. Unfortunately, we went about it in a manner which I find extemely troubling.

Richard W.

[xzins]

That the press circle around our dead in Iraq like buzzards looking for red meat for the treasonous Demonrats doesn't surprise me. What does suprise me are the number of freepers looking to play into their hands and giving into what is becoming a pack-media stampede.

Great points.

It's disgusting how they are almost gleeful in their gloating over our own dead soldiers. What makes far more sense is to fine tune methods of identifying, preventing and destroying snipers.

[annyokie]

Guys like you make me puke. We've been "in country" for four months.

Quagmire, my *ss.

[pierrem15]

What makes far more sense is to fine tune methods of identifying, preventing and destroying snipers.

I've wondered why we haven't heard about the Army deploying snipers, or spec ops, or a few 'sucker' convoys with snipers, M2's and 40mm granade launchers under the tarps, or heavy vehicle transporters with manned Bradleys sitting on them?

I hope it's because they don't want to reveal this to the enemy. Another thing to realize is every time we bust a door down at 2:00 in the morning it's because some Iraqi's ratted out some Baathists. These are not random searches.

[Burkeman1]

Yes- you should. Your "gun/knife" analogy was quite pathetic. And then your "thermonuclear response" thing was just insane. Bush would never launch a nuke unless one was launched against us and then only if he had proof of who did it. If Sadaam had used mustard gas or nerve gas or anthrax against our troops do you really think we would have used Nukes? Are you that obtuse and hateful?

[The Brush]

Sorry Douglas I can't agree. The Democratic line is "Bush lied" and "Lying about a BJ didn't get anyone killed"
The Democrats are looking for ANYTHING that they can find to show that Bush's moral compass is off.
First he was too stupid, when that failed he was a drunk, when that didn't work he was a cowboy, then they said we could have avoided 9/11 if he'd looked at the evidence, now they say the evidence of WMD was wrong and he acted too soon.
What's missed here is that Bush looked at intelligence he received and made decisions based on it. While it's impossible to please everyone all the time it's impossible to please a Democrat who hates him all the time.
If you listen to the Dems talk nothing Bush has done was right while everything Klinton did was perfect.
We can't demand perfection from anyone, what we can expect is that they will look at the intelligence in front of them and do what is in the best interest of our country.
If the WMD were removed from Iraq prior to the war and "some of us" claim that it never existed they win.<br? What we need to do is ask what happened to the weapons we knew were there and leave it up to Iraq to explain.

[pierrem15]

With that said, I'm glad we (right) now have a President that is steps ahead of the "politic-ing" (sp?) of typical Washington.

True-- think about the fact that the press is trying to whip this up as a political cataclysm for Bush. So what does he do? Does he stay in DC to give more credence to their twaddle by responding to it directly? Does he massage some White House photo ops, maybe a press dinner (those whores will sell themselves for a ribeye)? NO. He flies off on safari... LOL!

[pierrem15]

gloating over our own dead soldiers

Ted Rall in a nutshell. The only time the Left ever gives a rat's a-- about any American soldier or the whole class of white, black, brown, yellow and red Americans who serve in our armed forces is when they're being zipped up in a body bag.

Dear Lord, how I wish they would emigrate to Canada or some EUnuch state.

[Michael Barnes]

Twaddle...

LOL...

I was questioning how I should take you..Twaddle put that to rest..Have a good evening..

[PurVirgo]

Do you have a source that debunks that?

[boxerblues]

Can someone explain to me why if there are no WMD's why did the UN continue with the food for oil program taking millions of dollars from the Iraqi people, and not lift all the sanctions. Why are they (UN) not under the magnify glass?

[jwalsh07]

Actually Burkeman, it is you who is the pathetic soul. I told you what the policy of America is, was and has been for quite some time. That you are remain floating on the river denial is simply testimony to the sanctimonius twit you are.