Posted on 03/09/2010 6:15:31 PM PST by retrogo
Every post I see from you is some defense of Hollywood.
Nothing wrong with that, but your devotion seems more than I'd expect from just a fan.
Yes they do,
This post may shed some light on the matter:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2467612/posts?page=34#34
Maybe but almost everyone in the Intelligence community was convinced that Saddam and Iraq had MSD’s at some point and very quietly after the invasion they found some.
The real truth may never be known fully.
But Saddam and that brood of wild dogs that were his sons needed to be put down.
I hope this is an epic fail at the box office.
George Bush did not fake the WMD thing, no matter what you think you know, what you read. There is no conclusive evidence that he faked anything. That sort of casual overstatemnt of fact, is all to common nowadays. Again, I am sure you have something that you call evidence, and there the argument would start, but fact is. There is no evidence that George Bush faked the WMD thing. None. Had there been he would have been impeached. Period. He would be prosecuted NOW, if that were true. So, please lets be real.
Yeah, what a jerk.
We should wait until they're blowing up your kid's school.
There you go again - arguing based on personal attack. Weak and sad.
How about this for a movie plot, Son of Saudi billionaire with the aid of several mid-eastern and central asian intelligence agencies plan covert/overt war against the US and Western Civilization for religious reasons....
Nawwhh they’d never use that plot. It doesn’t make the US look bad.
Problem is - Iraq was not where the terrorists were. Saddam was not a religious zealot and he persecuted many who were. He was a ruthless political dictator, but no magnet for Jihadists. Only after we showed up and took Saddam out did the Islamofascists begin arriving
Agreed. It's too bad he didn't hire you as a technical adviser. But then, he'd never do that, since you actually served in the Green Zone... /g
I try to be civil on this forum, but you are utterly ignorant.
BEFORE Bush was sworn in, Clinton, Gore, Hillary, Albright and Clinton-appointed CIA Director George Tenet ALL stated unequivivcally that Saddam had WMD including an active nuclear program. And no western intelligence agency disagreed with that.
STOP believing Matt Damon and the Hollywood Congress of Emoting Imbeciles. Do some research.
/sarc Yeah..that's why the French intelligence thought Saddam had WMD’s at the time, despite the fact that the French goverment under Jacques Chirac hated Bush, and neveranted to invade Iraq. And that is why the British intelligence and every other single major Western intelligence agency was convinced Saddam had WMD’s.
When are you going to stop spreading loony left propaganda, dude?
And this surprises....Who?
And then we killed them.
You've been offered a host of rational reasons for the Resolution of War against Iraq. The Resolution itself offered 23 specific reasons -- none of them "fake".
It is you that -- weakly and sadly -- maintains your position in the face of such rational argument. Apparently because of an acute personal distaste for all things Bush.
You are accusing an American president of treason. Yet, you have absolutely no evidence -- only a political disagreement.
Exactly.
And if you recall, unsubstantiated reports stated that suspicions were that Iraq shipped what they had to Syria. Hell they (US soldiers) found caches of materials consistent with WMDs.
The entire world, based on intelligence from the US and other countries, also believed WMDs existed.
Faked WMDs...what nonsense. If you ask me, he (Bush) was overly prudent in invading. He clearly stated in his speech immediately after 9-11, that we will make NO DISTINCTION between terrorists and those who harbor terrorists.
Yes Bush made mistakes...but I felt a hell of alot more comfortable with him at the helm. He was at the very least, someone that could be reasoned with. What do we have now? A wannabe tyrant who is taking a wrecking ball to our Nation.
I’m sick and tired of BDS.
“If it’s being released this time of year, it’s a dog.”
If it’s anti American, the academy will love it.
Again...you are dead wrong. Post 9-11, there were various nations and national leaders aiding terrorists. All denied doing so except for one leader, and that leader OPENLY BOASTED that he was rewarding the families of suicide bombers. His name was Saddam Hussein.
Not the point. The point is, why did we dissipate into some non-terrorist area like Iraq instead of focusing on getting Osama bin Ladin and going after the real terrorist hot beds. We had some troops in Afghanistan but we could have had a lot more focus and effectivity without this convoluted Iraq thing. IMHO.
Closed in days for lack of viewers.
Sadly, Redford's Lions for Lambs, while a commercial flop with a paltry $15 million in box office receipts, outperformed The Hurt Locker by $2.5 million.
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.