Why Obama is scary...

[Michael Larson]

Kevin,

No one needs a war but sometimes one is necessary.

[Kevin M. Leonard]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Kevin,

No one needs a war but sometimes one is necessary.

I agree. But there is a difference between "need" and "want". Iraq was a war of choice. The Bush administration wanted that war. They didn't need it. And even though some are still in denial, you can bet your A** that if they had it to do over again they wouldn't be attacking Iraq.

And as far as Iran goes. If it erupts into a civil war it will be their war. Not ours, regardless of who we would rather have in power over there.

[Michael Larson]

Why would Bush have wanted that war?

And please don't be shallow.

[Kevin M. Leonard]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Why would Bush have wanted that war?

And please don't be shallow.

OIL

in really deep wells

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by kleonard

OIL

in really deep wells

Too bad you chose shallow.

It's the weakest argument for your assertion.

[Kevin M. Leonard]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Too bad you chose shallow.

It's the weakest argument for your assertion.

Ok Mr. I have all the right answers and your always wrong.

Please, Why did we attack Iraq, because they were going to nuke us? I know you have more intelligence than to believe that one. Don't you?

[Kevin M. Leonard]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Too bad you chose shallow.

It's the weakest argument for your assertion.

And the strongest argument for my assertion would be because it's the simple truth. But I understand why some like yourself are still in denial. Let it go Michael.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by kleonard

Ok Mr. I have all the right answers and your always wrong.

Please, Why did we attack Iraq, because they were going to nuke us? I know you have more intelligence than to believe that one. Don't you?

It must be hard for you to have you fantasy reason debunked

The possibility of nukes were only one issue.

[Michael Larson]

"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 reinvigorated 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, Dec, 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 Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. 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 years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (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. "[W]ithout 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 has 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.

NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? Right!!!

[Michael J. Merino]

You guys all get on here and bash each other. The truth is that none of us really know what the hell is going on. All I know is that since Obama took office, things are different. Does anyone realize HE FIRED A CEO of a major US corporation!!??? None of you were shocked by that? He wants to be able to decide how much money A CEO or hedge fund manager can earn, how long before he wants to decide how much YOU EARN. That is the definition of the government controlling the private sector. What about him violating the same law he sponsored? Firing an Inspector General, without notice or cause because he was investigating an Obama friend/supporter.

You can fight over who is to blame, left, right, conservatives, dems. But, your wasting your time. They are all to blame. You are to blame, I am to blame, We are to blame. We gave them too much power, we didn't check them, we allowed the press to fall down on the job. The government does not have any of the answers.

Let me ask you this question. Everyone remember that Nancy Pelosi said the the CIA lied to her about waterboarding. Everyone agree? OK. The congress has decided not to investigate the claim. What? We have either a Representative lying or the CIA lying, both which are major issues. But, they did decide to investigate whether Sammy Sosa lied to congress in 2005 about using steroids!!! WTF, these are the people you want leading this country. Who cares what Sammy Sosa did. I want to know who in my government is lying to me. This is why we are in this state. Most people do not know about this crap. And so goes our government. So keep fighting among yourselves, that way you won't have to face what is going on.

[Jae Williams]

Originally Posted by mmerino

You guys all get on here and bash each other.
You don't expect us to bash ourselves, do you?

The truth is that none of us really know what the hell is going on.
Well, of course we don't--we're home inspectors.

All I know is that since Obama took office, things are different. Does anyone realize HE FIRED A CEO of a major US corporation!!??? None of you were shocked by that?
I am, and it worries me quite a bunch.

e wants to be able to decide how much money A CEO or hedge fund manager can earn, how long before he wants to decide how much YOU EARN.
Fourteen weeks, six day, three hours and twelve minutes.

That is the definition of the government controlling the private sector.
That is the definition of "Obama and Friends."

What about him violating the same law he sponsored? Firing an Inspector General, without notice or cause because he was investigating an Obama friend/supporter.
"I'm just saying 'if the President does it, it's not a crime'." (I heard someone else say that once.)

You can fight over who is to blame, left, right, conservatives, dems. But, your wasting your time. They are all to blame. You are to blame, I am to blame, We are to blame. We gave them too much power, we didn't check them, we allowed the press to fall down on the job. The government does not have any of the answers.
And that is so true, so very true.

Let me ask you this question. Everyone remember that Nancy Pelosi said the the CIA lied to her about waterboarding. Everyone agree? OK. The congress has decided not to investigate the claim. What?
I'm just saying "if the Speaker of the House does it, it's not a crime."

We have either a Representative lying or the CIA lying, both which are major issues. But, they did decide to investigate whether Sammy Sosa lied to congress in 2005 about using steroids!!! WTF, these are the people you want leading this country. Who cares what Sammy Sosa did.
I didn't bet on the Government, but I did bet on the Cubbies.

I want to know who in my government is lying to me.
Start with the letter "A" and finish with the letter "Z"--that should just about cover it.

This is why we are in this state. Most people do not know about this crap. And so goes our government. So keep fighting among yourselves, that way you won't have to face what is going on.

Some levity in my response, but Michael J, this was a very accurate depiction of the folks in this country who claim to be 'the best informed in the world".

Actually, we are ill-informed, mis-informed, un-informed, and it is purposely done so.

You are RIGHT ON, my man...RIGHT ON!

[Kevin M. Leonard]

Originally Posted by mlarson

"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 reinvigorated 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, Dec, 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 Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. 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 years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (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. "[W]ithout 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 has 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.

NOW THE DEMOCRATS SAY PRESIDENT BUSH LIED, THAT THERE NEVER WERE ANY WMD'S AND HE TOOK US TO WAR FOR HIS OIL BUDDIES??? Right!!!

Nice quotes. Unfortunately the Democrats had absolutely NO backbone at all. They were scared they would look weak and the Right most certainly pushed the issue. They were afraid to stand up to the Bush Administration. They gave Bush and his Crony War Mongers every F**n thing they asked for. IMO the Dems are a bunch of F**n pushovers who, like all Politicians are more worried about how they are perceived than doing what's right for our Country.

But today after the fact many on the left & right finally admitted it was a mistake. But there are still those who can't or won't admit their mistakes. Many are in STILL in denial, The Likes of Bush, Cheney & Rummy to name just a few.

The Iraqi war was not only a mistake. It was a catastrophic huge mistake that cost us dearly. And I blame the Dems for not stopping it as much as I blame the Bush Administration for starting it.

And I'm sure you do remember Cheney's old Company Halliburton getting no bid - Billion dollar contracts. Ahh,,Democracy at it's finest.

[Michael Larson]

Originally Posted by kleonard

Nice quotes. ........

And I'm sure you do remember Cheney's old Company Halliburton getting no bid - Billion dollar contracts. Ahh,,Democracy at it's finest.

Glad you like them, now please own them.

As far as no bid contracts, Clinton also let no bid contracts to Halliburton.

The Facts on Halliburton

It is certainly true that during a two year period Halliburton’s revenue from Defense Department contracts doubled. However, that increase in revenue occurred from
1998 to 2000 - during the Clinton administration.

Read the whole thing and maybe you will realize that this Haliburton "club" is a Democrat invention and little more.

In the hindsight of 20/20, most of can say we wish Iraq had been handled differently but we can't put the mess back in it's can.

[Kevin M. Leonard]

Originally Posted by mlarson

Glad you like them, now please own them.

As far as no bid contracts, Clinton also let no bid contracts to Halliburton.

The Facts on Halliburton

It is certainly true that during a two year period Halliburton’s revenue from Defense Department contracts doubled. However, that increase in revenue occurred from
1998 to 2000 - during the Clinton administration.

Read the whole thing and maybe you will realize that this Haliburton "club" is a Democrat invention and little more.

In the hindsight of 20/20, most of can say we wish Iraq had been handled differently but we can't put the mess back in it's can.

That artlicle is pure bunk & you know it Michael.

FBI Investigates Halliburton's No-Bid Contracts

FBI widens investigation of Halliburton's no-bid $7 billion contract in Iraq.

Halliburton defrauding the government of Billions of taxpayers dollars

[Kevin M. Leonard]

Originally Posted by mlarson

In the hindsight of 20/20, most of can say we wish Iraq had been handled differently but we can't put the mess back in it's can.

Your getting there.