Bush has failed to answer for Sept. 11 - moved

[stephanie]

No they never said it out right they just made 70 % of the America believe striking Saddam was fighting AQ.

?

[jimnyc]

No they never said it out right they just made 70 % of the America believe striking Saddam was fighting AQ.

And the inability of many to comprehend the situation means what? And your percentages, from another poll that samples .000001% again?

[Gaffer]

No person in their right mind will vote for Hillary. Or Tancredo.

Note to WRdude: No one has "defended our country" since WWII. You may have served in the military, but you did not "defend our country." Because our country has not been threatened. You silly whining merely points out how ridiculously uneducated and uninformed you are.

I read the responses to my thread. Obviously, none of you read it correctly. You have simply regurgitated the same stale old talking points.
The invasion of Iraq WAS the Bush response to Sept. 11. If you remember the idiots who attempted to link Saddam with the attacks. It is obvious that he didn't give a shit about bin Laden. Dubya merely wanted to take personal vengeance on Saddam.

You can post the WTC attack all you want. It doesn't explain why we never captured bin Laden. Or why we did not hold the Saudis accountable for the attacks. Instead, we took out someone who meant nothing.

Proudly showing your ignorance again.

In WW2 how much combat took place in this country? The country was defended by taking the fight to the enemy. It has been that way since then as well. You don't defend the country by barricading yourself and waiting to be attacked.

Anyone in uniform is defending their country by serving their country. It's not what you do but what you might have to do that qualifies as serving and defending the country.

bin laden has not been captured because he's hiding in pakistan and no one wants to start a war with them at this point. They want to try to buy their cooperation. Would you support an invasion of pakistan just to get bin laden? My bet is you would just call Bush a warmonger for attacking another innocent country that just happened to be harboring a mass murderer.

[gabosaurus]

Ridiculous points. Why did we invade Iraq? They had nothing that we needed or wanted. There are more than a dozen lunatic mass murderers running countries. Why did we choose one of them? Or did it just happen to be the one that dissed Bush's daddy?
The U.S. was attacked in World War II. We had war declared on us. The U.S. did not attack a country without provocation.

And too many liberals have confused the overall War on Jihad - nobody ever said Iraq or Saddam were behind 9/11 ...

You have a selective memory. Cheney said it a couple of times. Rice also made the connection.

[jimnyc]

Ridiculous points. Why did we invade Iraq? They had nothing that we needed or wanted. There are more than a dozen lunatic mass murderers running countries. Why did we choose one of them? Or did it just happen to be the one that dissed Bush's daddy?

Can you please list all of those that were under UN resolutions, and were failing to abide by said resolutions for over a decade. Thanks!

[gabosaurus]

I thought that the U.S. didn't respect the U.N.? Are they not merely a worthless organization with no teeth or power? Or do ConReps merely pick and choose when they want to play the U.N. Card?
And those were not really U.N. resolutions. They were U.S. resolutions. And punitive ones at that.

[manu1959]

Ridiculous points. Why did we invade Iraq?
violation of cease fire terms and violation of 18 UN resolutions

They had nothing that we needed or wanted. There are more than a dozen lunatic mass murderers running countries. Why did we choose one of them?
one at a time you war monger

Or did it just happen to be the one that dissed Bush's daddy?
attempted assassination is not exactly a dis

The U.S. was attacked in World War II. We had war declared on us. The U.S. did not attack a country without provocation.
a us ally was attacked by saddam and the terms of the withdrawal and cease fire violated

You have a selective memory. Cheney said it a couple of times. Rice also made the connection.
as did kerry, edwards, kennedy, biden, pelosi and most of the house and senate

[jimnyc]

I thought that the U.S. didn't respect the U.N.? Are they not merely a worthless organization with no teeth or power? Or do ConReps merely pick and choose when they want to play the U.N. Card?
And those were not really U.N. resolutions. They were U.S. resolutions. And punitive ones at that.

Sorry, they were UN resolutions, specifically 1441 and 687.

And where is the list I asked for?

[manu1959]

I thought that the U.S. didn't respect the U.N.? Are they not merely a worthless organization with no teeth or power? Or do ConReps merely pick and choose when they want to play the U.N. Card?
And those were not really U.N. resolutions. They were U.S. resolutions. And punitive ones at that.

the libs respect the UN....thus you should respect Bush for enforcing the UN resolutions...seems you are picking and choosing as well....

[Gunny]

you are probably right on that, but the problem imo is, there is no republican out there to vote for that is any better than clinton, and that's a sad state...for us all!

I disagree. There are a couple of Republicans who are better. What you meant was there are no Democrats out there better?

[Gunny]

No person in their right mind will vote for Hillary. Or Tancredo.

Note to WRdude: No one has "defended our country" since WWII. You may have served in the military, but you did not "defend our country." Because our country has not been threatened. You silly whining merely points out how ridiculously uneducated and uninformed you are.

I read the responses to my thread. Obviously, none of you read it correctly. You have simply regurgitated the same stale old talking points.
The invasion of Iraq WAS the Bush response to Sept. 11. If you remember the idiots who attempted to link Saddam with the attacks. It is obvious that he didn't give a shit about bin Laden. Dubya merely wanted to take personal vengeance on Saddam.

You can post the WTC attack all you want. It doesn't explain why we never captured bin Laden. Or why we did not hold the Saudis accountable for the attacks. Instead, we took out someone who meant nothing.

Bull. You're blowing smoke. Simple as that.

[Gunny]

And many have forgotten that Saddam and Iraq have been proven to have nothing to do with that day.

Not those who never thought he did; which, apparently would be everyone except some gullible lefties who conveniently "thought so" after the fact to make yet another baseless accusation against Bush.

[Gunny]

No they never said it out right they just made 70 % of the America believe striking Saddam was fighting AQ.

That's as bullshit now as it has been since the first time I saw it.

[Gunny]

Ridiculous points. Why did we invade Iraq? They had nothing that we needed or wanted. There are more than a dozen lunatic mass murderers running countries. Why did we choose one of them? Or did it just happen to be the one that dissed Bush's daddy?
The U.S. was attacked in World War II. We had war declared on us. The U.S. did not attack a country without provocation.



You have a selective memory. Cheney said it a couple of times. Rice also made the connection.

You are quite incorrect. Do your homework. The Bush admin's official stance has been to deny any connection between one and the other since a couple of days after 9/11.

Your argument about Saddam is disengenuous at best. We babysat his ass from Feb 91 up to the day we invaded. We had 12 years of his bullshit. Hardly makes him any old run of the mill despot.

[avatar4321]

Ridiculous points. Why did we invade Iraq? They had nothing that we needed or wanted. There are more than a dozen lunatic mass murderers running countries. Why did we choose one of them? Or did it just happen to be the one that dissed Bush's daddy?
The U.S. was attacked in World War II. We had war declared on us. The U.S. did not attack a country without provocation.



You have a selective memory. Cheney said it a couple of times. Rice also made the connection.

Wait. you libs have been declaring for years that we went into Iraq for oil. How is that possible if they had nothign we needed or wanted?