If you don't like what's going on in Iraq, you should spread the blame.

Lobster Cowboy

New member
Yes yes, everyone is against Bush. I can't say I love him either.

However, if you believe that he, and he alone lied to America about Iraq, it's time to wake the fuck up.

Earlier tonight, some anti-gov't radio personality played some damning audio cuts from the Clinton administration, where every single Democrat believed that Iraq had WMD, and that a regime change was necessary.

We're talking EVERY major Democrat. Hillary Clinton, John Kerry, Joe Biden, etc. All saying the same thing, 4-5 years BEFORE Dubya was elected.

Now we riducule Bush, and Bush alone for taking action, calling him a warmonger? Time for liberals to shut the fuck up---you're as much to blame as the conservatives. If you truly oppose the war, and you voted for John Kerry, you're stupider than you realize. He was on Meet the Press in 1997, condemning Iraq, Saddam, and talking about WMDs. Hillary Clinton was on the same program, saying there was no way to stop Iraq without taking down Saddam, and saying how dangerous they were to the US.

Now that something was done, something proposed and supported years ago by the opposition party, Bush takes all the blame for committing action? This automatic anti-Bush shit is starting to disgust me with its hipocracy. Bush is evil! Bush is evil! He starts teh evil war!

"But your man Bill Clinton supported action many years ago."

"Oh, uh, BUSH SUCKS!"

I would never vote for him, but he sure doesn't deserve the abuse he's getting.
 

soniczip

New member
> I would never vote for him, but he sure doesn't deserve the
> abuse he's getting.
>

I have never agreed more with a backroom post. He DOESN'T!
I don't like Mr. Botox, I don't like Dubya. But Mr. Botox is acknowledging his past actions as much as Jack Thompson praises video games. I mean, COME ON!
"Bush is evil." And some people are hypocrites.
 

Fla Flash

Staff (News -- Rom Hacking)
Clinton didn't start the war. Bush did.
Case closed.
You're thought process is good, but the logic is flawed.
Same with all you carbon based life forms.
 

Blade556

New member
You will die for your heresy

I'm sure I've seen you bash bush on his bare ass before. Somewhere.

Maybe in hell...Who knows...

But I believe Lobster may be right.

HOWEVER. How in the hell were we supposed to know this?

Did ANYONE bring this up before today?

Not really. And not bloody likely, either. God forbid the Democrats might have supported the war they are trying to condemn.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by Blade556 on 11/15/05 09:54 PM.</FONT></P>
 

MegaManJuno

New member
Re: You will die for your heresy

> HOWEVER. How in the hell were we supposed to know this?

Well, judging by Lobster's post, if you watched Meet the Press in 1997, there's one way you could have known. <img src=smilies/magbiggrin.gif>

Don't tell me I'm the only one here who knew about this already...? Hell, and I don't even watch Meet the Press.
 

Blade556

New member
Re: You will die for your heresy

If I had bothered to be up to date with current events when I was eleven, I might be a little more understanding...
 

Isildur

New member
Re: You will die for your heresy

> If I had bothered to be up to date with current events when
> I was eleven, I might be a little more understanding...
>

Well, now you know... and knowing is half the battle. G.I. JOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOE!

<p id="signature">

<center><img src=http://pages.nyu.edu/~jc73/misc/FieryAshNazg.gif></center></p>
 

Danoz

New member
The Democrats play politics too? *surprised face*. Yeah, at a time when it was popular to believe Saddam was a threat with weapons of mass destruction for the Democrats, that's the rhetoric they used. All of the major news stations, before 9/11, even speculated that there were connections between Saddam and Osama Bin Laden. Even John Kerry can be quoted saying that Saddam is a "threat with nuclear weapons", and encouraged people not to vote for him if they didn't believe the same (this is something he easily played off as a "victim of deception" along side the American people).

I agree with you, and no, your logic isn't flawed. You're seeing politics for politics. Look at this war, nobody wants to be in the circle of blame... would you really expect prominent Democrats to deliberately put themselves in the middle of it when they have zero political reason to do so? Their constituents and people in the anti-war movement certainly don't hold them responsible. When it comes to the masses, blame has to fall on something tangible; for Republicans, it's Intelligence. For Democrats, it's Bush. At this point, it's irrelevant because the war, justified or not, has been handled poorly-- and that blame will always fall back on the Commander and Chief.
 

Lenophis

New member
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

and that blame will always fall back on the Commander and Chief.

<hr></blockquote>
Often times whenever anything happens, whether that President deserved blamed or not is irrelevant. Said President gets blame beacause it happened under his watch. It's been like that for a very long time now.
 

Lenophis

New member
<blockquote><font class="small">In reply to:</font><hr>

However, if you believe that he, and he alone lied to America about Iraq, it's time to wake the fuck up.

<hr></blockquote>
So long as the two parties have power the way they do, everything will be fucked up until somebody raises eyebrows and questions are asked. Until then, everything will be determined by the two stickers that are attached to each party, which if you ask me, is a crock.

Leno for System Reform, 2006.
 

Gavin_86

New member
That's all well and nice but chew on this one: Clinton never invaded Iraq. Bush invaded Iraq. See how nicely that works?

The fact of the matter is that practically Bush's entire war cabinet had a bent towards the "freeing of Iraq" before Bush was even in office. Check out basically anything Paul Wolfowitz wrote about Iraq ~1997 or so (I hope I'm giving you the correct timeframe). .. and probably just anything ever anyway. Look at how many cabinet members signed on with the Project for the New American Century.

So what that the democrats also thought there were WMD's? Since when did they have anything that can be construed as "brains" or "the power of reason". Not to mention there were some legitimate intelligence failures. And why can't it just be both? That the intelligence failures had us holding on to incorrect notions of Iraq's massive missing stockpiles of WMD's and that the Administration did have a particular slant on the issue. In all honesty I think that's the most reasonable conclusion.

I do spread the blame. A pretty much lame congress who had like what, 10% of their body actually read whatever bill they signed to give the president authority on such a weighty matter? But in my opinion it's a pretty weak arguement to say, "look, they fucked up too!". Ultimetly it was the President's idea, he proposed out of who the fuck knows how far down left field, he got everyone on the bandwagon. It's his war and the buck has to stop somewhere. That's what the executive office is for, and when you make decisions like that and turn out on the wrong side of the coin flip you take flak. I really don't think there is anything wrong with that.

I think you'll find, at least in my own opinion, that most people upset with the president are just as upset with him because of how he conducted the whole operation as much as what initial reason got us into it. Not just what has been judged as incompetant management, but even his attitude towards dissenters. Someone was bringing up Ronald Reagan and the Iran Contra scandal as a good example: he ultimatly ended up apologizing to the american people for the whole situation. I think some will say that Iraq isn't anything close to Iran Contra in terms of "scandal", but people now have an uneasy feeling about it. I'm not making a defiant stand for him to apologize in a similar fashion (although I would welcome it), it's the feeling that he wouldn't anyway. It's just the kind of politics they play. They won't ever admit they're wrong, and they'll go down to the end of 8 years singing songs about WMD's and the amazing democratization of the middle east.
 
They're all liars and crooks, and we should get rid of all of them and start fresh. The government needs to be comprised of people with real world experience, not people that were born into politics, we need common citizens in office if we ever want this country to be run the way it was meant to be.
 
Top Bottom