Who Really Lied To Start The War In Iraq?

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='jckinsman' post='1259454' date='Apr 29 2007, 12:52 AM']Hey !!!!! Let's not forget! 9/11 is not a number, It was a horrible day, I sat glued to the TV wondering when and where the next plane was going to hit. I was scared! No one who who's human wasn't! Remember Bush's speech??? He said if you were a terrorist, we were coming after you end of the story.(No not in those words) I don't think he was thinking, "Wow, here's a time to avenge my familys name"or "Hey let's go steal oil, now's our chance" (I could have alot of fun right now, but I will refrain!) No way, No matter what the liberal media's selling. I'm not buying it. Do I agree with the war? I will always be saddened by it. I do think that Bush felt threatened. After seeing what he did on that day. He was going to do what it took to bring them ALL down. But we as americans, want what we want, huh? We want it now. *mind drifts away to a scence in willy wonka and the chocolate factory,when the bratty spoiled girl enters the golden egg room and sing her song* Bush knew it was going to take time. Years! Come on people, Look what he's dealing with? Pull out now, and we will regret it! Do you realize what would happen? Can you grasp the whole picture globally????? YIKKES! The truth is I think we all would like to see it end. I think even Bush would agree. Can he really do that though? So going back to the question, Do you think Bush knew? I think he knew alot more then the public and media did (AS IT SHOULD BE) and I think he did what he needed to do, givin' the circumstance and the times. Never was a war waged so carefully. How quickly we forget! You think Bush wanted a war? I think you are nuts! Remember who started it............all of us on earth (religon,politics,$,your sister) Remember WHO will finish it! ..................pray for peace! JC[/quote]

Don't forget the Imposed war, in which the US gave Saddam weapons to kill Iranians, in which over a million Iranians died. Does it justify Iranians going to war with the US and does 9-11 justify bombing Iraq? No... if you use hurt as a weapon, its just going to keep going back and fourth.

[jckinsman]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1259467' date='Apr 29 2007, 03:41 AM']Don't forget the Imposed war, in which the US gave Saddam weapons to kill Iranians, in which over a million Iranians died. Does it justify Iranians going to war with the US and does 9-11 justify bombing Iraq? No... if you use hurt as a weapon, its just going to keep going back and fourth.[/quote]
Your right! We should learn from the past to create a better future,..........It's just too bad we live in a world filled with humans! The question was do we think Bush knew, though! I thought that Bush knew alot more then we did! He went to war based on that. I don't think that he took that lightly. He had no control over the weapons that were sold to Saddam, years ago. He does however, have control over what happens now. Diplomacy does not work with terrorist. Terrorist are beyond hurt, they are filled with rage. Let that go and it will make 9-11 look like a tea party.We do have the right to defend ourselves. Do I like war ??? Not at all! Bush is in a horrible position, I pray for him! We all should! Who will be the one to stop all of this???? ..............Like I said above,God will!.......he can change things through our prayers! JC

Edited April 29, 2007 by jckinsman

[RezaMikhaeil]

[quote name='jckinsman' post='1259578' date='Apr 29 2007, 10:20 AM']Your right! We should learn from the past to create a better future,..........It's just too bad we live in a world filled with humans! The question was do we think Bush knew, though! I thought that Bush knew alot more then we did! He went to war based on that. I don't think that he took that lightly. He had no control over the weapons that were sold to Saddam, years ago. He does however, have control over what happens now. Diplomacy does not work with terrorist. Terrorist are beyond hurt, they are filled with rage. Let that go and it will make 9-11 look like a tea party.We do have the right to defend ourselves. Do I like war ??? Not at all! Bush is in a horrible position, I pray for him! We all should! Who will be the one to stop all of this???? ..............Like I said above,God will!.......he can change things through our prayers! JC[/quote]

My mentioning of the imposed war was in responde to your quote:

[quote]Let's not forget! 9/11 is not a number, It was a horrible day[/quote]

...and the point is that our "horrible day" is nothing in comparision to "the horrible day" that we've given others. This is rarely ever thought of by americans, that maybe what americans has done, has caused the hurt of others and caused them to be anti-american but it's an idea that should be entertained because it's the truth. In this war [as in every other war] it just goes back and fourth. "you hurt me, killed by children so I'm going to hurt you and kill your children" and it goes back and fourth until someone has some self-control and turns the other cheek.

It's a fact that Americans expect Iran to turn the other cheek to the fact that Americans were an accomplice to the murder of millions of Iranians! Tell me, why should Iranians turn the other cheek, when Americans aren't ever willing to turn their other cheek or even appologize for the past?

Reza

[jckinsman]

Maybe, I am not making my self very clear. I think that we agree on what you said 100%! Turning the other cheek is everything, as christians, we should do. I know that! I can find it easy to turn my other cheek ,when I know where it will lead! The difference is, WHOLE contries have a much harder time doing so! Bush, for instance had lots of people helping him right? He made the choice based on all he knew as our leader,he chose to go to war. We as just average citizens, sit back in our chairs at night and think how best to handle this situation? We don't even have a clue the politics over war that goes on at the white house. Let alone a third world country! Turning the other cheek is not really choice #1 for them because of the pressure. Now maybe for Bush...If Mrs. B took a can of soda shook it and sprayed him down with it,he could turn the other cheek. As far as 9 11 goes, alot tougher~He can only deal with what he can have control over. This is a sad state of affairs! PRAY PRAY PRAY

[musturde]

I agree with Reza, America and Israel have this in common. We demand more respect for our country than we are willing to give to others. Sometimes we almost come off as bullies (as much of the world already portrays us as).

Edited May 3, 2007 by musturde

[Winchester]

[quote name='RezaLemmyng' post='1260921' date='Apr 30 2007, 05:30 PM']My mentioning of the imposed war was in responde to your quote:
...and the point is that our "horrible day" is nothing in comparision to "the horrible day" that we've given others. This is rarely ever thought of by americans, that maybe what americans has done, has caused the hurt of others and caused them to be anti-american but it's an idea that should be entertained because it's the truth. In this war [as in every other war] it just goes back and fourth. "you hurt me, killed by children so I'm going to hurt you and kill your children" and it goes back and fourth until someone has some self-control and turns the other cheek.

It's a fact that Americans expect Iran to turn the other cheek to the fact that Americans were an accomplice to the murder of millions of Iranians! Tell me, why should Iranians turn the other cheek, when Americans aren't ever willing to turn their other cheek or even appologize for the past?

Reza[/quote]
I just spent several minutes typing a reponse. I was logged in. I went to post and it told me to log in, and the only part of my post that survived was this vapid quote above.

SCREW INVISION POWER! THEY smell of elderberries!

sigh...

[dairygirl4u2c]

this poll is flawed, either or without the right options. bush and white house lied by stretching the connection between al quieda and iraq. this is evidenced by the fact no one ever defends it when presented with teh evience. a few deny they thought that they heard a connection was concocted, but when presented with teh evidence which is readily acceisble from media records, no one denies it concocts a connection that did not exist.

[Aloysius]

this poll was more about the question of whether Bush lied about WMDs or not. The thesis was basically: Sadam's scientists reported to Sadam that he had WMDs, the intelligence reflected this and thus caused Bush to believe that there were WMDs. If Sadam himself believed he was in possession of WMDs, then it'd be perfectly understandable for us to think he did based on the intelligence we received about what his scientists had told him.

imagine: secret CIA phone tap on Saddam Hussein

ring ring
Sadam: Hello?
Scientist: Hello Sadam, this is your favorite scientist speaking.
Sadam: Ahhh, hello there, have you produced some WMDs then?
Scientist: well....
Sadam: because you know if you don't come up with some I'll have to cut off your hands or something silly like that.
Scienist: ahhh... yeah... you see, we totally got it working. just name the time and place, we'll be able to nuke and/or chemically attack ppl.

whose fault would it be if a peice of intelligence like that phone call had led to an invasion of Iraq?

[gamesfanatic04]

The sad thing is we aren't even fighting a war. Oh we have soldiers in another country and occasionally something gets shot but this is no war. In one of our centuries last wars the US army bombed a 11th century monastery to kill 1 German sniper. In todays war all members of the peaceful religion of peaceful peace have to do is run into a mosque secure in the knowledge that the US will stop at least 20 feet from the door. Turn the cameras off and send the journalists home, let the military fight this war without civilians for 3 days and it will be over for good

[bonoducchi]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1309486' date='Jul 2 2007, 02:21 PM']this poll was more about the question of whether Bush lied about WMDs or not. The thesis was basically: Sadam's scientists reported to Sadam that he had WMDs, the intelligence reflected this and thus caused Bush to believe that there were WMDs. If Sadam himself believed he was in possession of WMDs, then it'd be perfectly understandable for us to think he did based on the intelligence we received about what his scientists had told him.

imagine: secret CIA phone tap on Saddam Hussein

ring ring
Sadam: Hello?
Scientist: Hello Sadam, this is your favorite scientist speaking.
Sadam: Ahhh, hello there, have you produced some WMDs then?
Scientist: well....
Sadam: because you know if you don't come up with some I'll have to cut off your hands or something silly like that.
Scienist: ahhh... yeah... you see, we totally got it working. just name the time and place, we'll be able to nuke and/or chemically attack ppl.

whose fault would it be if a peice of intelligence like that phone call had led to an invasion of Iraq?[/quote]

There is intelligence and there is [b]credible intelligence[/b]. You can't base a war on intercepting a scientist lying about his job productivity. You have to have credible physical evidence that "yes, there are" or 'no there are not." If we had a phone conversation on tape, then we should have been working harder to figure out [u]if it is reliable or not[/u]. We can't just be waiting with our guys in the planes and when we hear some low-level flunky say "yeah, we've got anthrax ready to go", send everyone in like bees on a popsicle. Even if scientists lied to Saddam, we still have the responsibility to reasonably confirm that intelligence before we rush in and destabilize the entire region for decades to come.

[GodChaser]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='105844' date='Jan 26 2004, 11:28 PM']ppl say bush lied to take us to war. i disagree.

there was an artical in the Washington Post.. i'm too lazy to remember when it was...

but from the intelligence we have we know for certain that Saddam Hussein AT LEAST believed that he had weopons of mass destruction. his scientists were afraid to report failure. HIS SCIENTISTS lied to him about the success of weapons programs... these weapons existed on paper, the threat existed on paper, Bush made the prudent decision based on the apparent threat

-_-

what do you think about this theory?[/quote]
And if you really believe that, I have swamp land that I can sell you!



Sorry Al, but I can't help but laugh at that one.



Who lied, President Bush lied, and was told to lie to convince the people they had to go to war.

His masters want a war between the Muslim and Christian world, so after it, everybody will turn away from either religions, and they will go for their ready made Beast Religion!

Too bad, their efforts are for naught, because more and more people are waking up the the dangers of this war. So please, wake up soon. Our elected leaders lied to us. We don't need them. We need to stand against their tyranny. Lets make our voices be heard!

Oh yeah, 9/11 is an inside job, and the war on terror is the second horsemen of the apocolypse!

Edited July 3, 2007 by GodChaser

[bonoducchi]

Hate to quote a bumper sticker, but...

"No one died when Clinton lied."

[Didacus]

Being Canadien, the best I can say is that I would trust Bush more than our own politicians.

[kamiller42]

The following is true. Plenty of evidence to support each.

1. Bush never said Iraq was responsible for 9/11.

2. Bush never said with absolute certainty that Iraq had WMD. He spoke of possibilities and potentialities.

3. Members of Bush's cabinet and the VP have given the same official position Bush stated again and again. The [b]personal[/b] opinions of some spoke with a greater degree of certainty.

4. Per the treaty of Gulf War I, the burden of proof of WMDs or not was on Saddam, not the U.S. Saddam obstructed justice again and again and failed to account for what the UN tallied post-Gulf War I.

5. Saddam Hussein was maintaining an underground nuclear weapons program funded by the Oil for Food scandal. It was slow but progressive. No doubt if we left the region it would have come above ground in the same fashion Ahmadinejad rattles his nuclear threats.

6. Prior to the war, liberal and conservative sources were in agreement about Iraq's WMD potential and felt action was necessary.

7. Prior to the war, worldwide intelligence services were in agreement about strong evidence indicating the threat of Saddam's Iraq.

8. Prior to the war, worldwide humanitarian organizations were in agreement about the crimes against humanity and the environment taking place in Iraq.

9. Small quantities of chemical weapons have been found in Iraq.

10. Large quantities of chemical weapons stocked prior to Gulf War I were found.

11. PJP II spoke against both Gulf Wars as examples of the failure of humanity. This is what I expect from just about every pope would say as all wars are a failure of humanity. I would worry about a pope who says "Hooray for war!"

12. Prior to the invasion, Bush said this commitment would take many years to see through, even beyond his presidency.

13. The average Iraqi does want America there as long as their own forces are unable to stabilize Iraq.

14. President Bush did NOT lie. He made the best judgment with the information he was given.

IMO, the decision to invade was right. It still is right. The job would be completed much faster if the "patriotic objectors" would object after the soldiers come home.

"No one died when Clinton lied." Really? Ask the staff working at the aspirin factory. Oops. I don't question his decision. I question the timing of the decision. It seems every time a piece of evidence revealing his cover-up was exposed, Clinton decided to play "commander-in-chief." And don't discount the moral damage caused by his finger wagging lies and his "what is 'is'?" game.

[GodChaser]

[quote name='kamiller42' post='1311895' date='Jul 3 2007, 10:45 PM']The following is true. Plenty of evidence to support each.

1. Bush never said Iraq was responsible for 9/11.

2. Bush never said with absolute certainty that Iraq had WMD. He spoke of possibilities and potentialities.

3. Members of Bush's cabinet and the VP have given the same official position Bush stated again and again. The [b]personal[/b] opinions of some spoke with a greater degree of certainty.

4. Per the treaty of Gulf War I, the burden of proof of WMDs or not was on Saddam, not the U.S. Saddam obstructed justice again and again and failed to account for what the UN tallied post-Gulf War I.

5. Saddam Hussein was maintaining an underground nuclear weapons program funded by the Oil for Food scandal. It was slow but progressive. No doubt if we left the region it would have come above ground in the same fashion Ahmadinejad rattles his nuclear threats.

6. Prior to the war, liberal and conservative sources were in agreement about Iraq's WMD potential and felt action was necessary.

7. Prior to the war, worldwide intelligence services were in agreement about strong evidence indicating the threat of Saddam's Iraq.

8. Prior to the war, worldwide humanitarian organizations were in agreement about the crimes against humanity and the environment taking place in Iraq.

9. Small quantities of chemical weapons have been found in Iraq.

10. Large quantities of chemical weapons stocked prior to Gulf War I were found.

11. PJP II spoke against both Gulf Wars as examples of the failure of humanity. This is what I expect from just about every pope would say as all wars are a failure of humanity. I would worry about a pope who says "Hooray for war!"

12. Prior to the invasion, Bush said this commitment would take many years to see through, even beyond his presidency.

13. The average Iraqi does want America there as long as their own forces are unable to stabilize Iraq.

14. President Bush did NOT lie. He made the best judgment with the information he was given.

IMO, the decision to invade was right. It still is right. The job would be completed much faster if the "patriotic objectors" would object after the soldiers come home.

"No one died when Clinton lied." Really? Ask the staff working at the aspirin factory. Oops. I don't question his decision. I question the timing of the decision. It seems every time a piece of evidence revealing his cover-up was exposed, Clinton decided to play "commander-in-chief." And don't discount the moral damage caused by his finger wagging lies and his "what is 'is'?" game.[/quote]
And you must believe it was Muslims with wire cutters took over 4 planes, and flew them into the twin towers, and the Pentegon. . .

I have more common sense to realize they were helped, by whom, I don't know, but they were helped along to accomplish their mission.

Glory to God and Power to the Resistance!