Clinton wants all U.S. troops out of Iraq when Bush leaves office

[Gunny]

I just love the right wing lies.

So what exactly did Iraq have to do with 9/11... hint... it didn't.

And wanna talk about preventing 9/11? Let's talk about the Presidential Daily Briefing of August, 2001 that Bush was too busy clearing brush to be bothered with.

And I wasn't even going there....

I don't suppose you are ever going to get past representing the information most of the intelligence agencies in the world believed to be true at the time as purposefully given false info?

Anyone with a functioning brain at the time believed Saddam had and was pursuing more WMDs. Since you're no dummy, I'd say that would include you.

Monday morning quarterbacking is bad form.

We went to war with Spain in 1898 because we believed the blowing up and sinking of the USS Maine was an act of sabotage by the Spanish. It was later discovered the ship blew up because of a faulty boiler.

Saddam possessed and used WMDs. Established fact. Lots of pics of lots of gassed Kurds to prove it.

Saddam was caught AFTER (1993) a ceasefire agreement he signed with an active bio weapons manufacturing lab.

If Saddam wasn't playing a shell game with the UN inspectors, he did a damned-convincing job of appearing that he was.

Had Saddam complied with the agreement he made to get us off his butt in 1991, there'd have been no grounds for argument. When you do the math with the numbers available at the time, it all adds up that he was trying to hide WMDs; which, he had proven he was willing to use.

I recall Saddam being tied to terrorism, but I don't recall anyone officially stating he was part of 9/11. He was accused of harboring AQ members.

[Pale Rider]

In any case.... getting back to hitlery.... she wants the president to withdraw all troops from Iraq before he leaves office. In other words, "she wants president Bush to SURRENDER before he leaves office".

I think the fight in Iraq is a good thing. I think we should stay there, because the terrorists have decided to fight us there. If we leave, they'll come right back here INTO America with another bombing or whatever. We'll just have to go right back over there SOMEWHERE and START ALL OVER AGAIN. Why not stay there, right where we've got a good start? Do the liberals REALLY BELIEVE that if we leave Iraq, the terrorist problem will just MAGICALLY go away? If you do.... heeeeerre's your picture....



The liberal "cut and run" strategy is a loser's strategy. We'll suffer far worse with that type of action by far, than standing and fighting these blood thirsty killers on their own soil, AWAY from America.

[avatar4321]

Exactly what we keep saying to the folk who keep insisting Iraq had something to do with 9/11 or was an "imminent threat".

How can anyone honestly claim they dont understand why we went into Iraq? its been detailed for 5+ years. Nothing has changed. The fact is you want to pretend as though nothing changed with 9/11.

The world isnt the same. We cant wait around and hope we wont be attacked. We have to be proactive.

[retiredman]

Jilly! I knew you'd jump on that one!

Of course, Bush didn't inherit ANY messes from the PREVIOUS Billary administration. :cough: couldhavetakenOsama :cough: prevented9/11 :cough:

please explain to me what evidence we had against Osama in the spring of '96 that would have allowed us to take custody of a foreign national on foreign soil and incarcerate him.

[jillian]

How can anyone honestly claim they dont understand why we went into Iraq? its been detailed for 5+ years. Nothing has changed. The fact is you want to pretend as though nothing changed with 9/11.

The world isnt the same. We cant wait around and hope we wont be attacked. We have to be proactive.

And the ever-changing reasons from the admin are still as full of it today as they were at the onset.

You can choose to buy whatever self-serving statements they make. I don't.

[jillian]

In any case.... getting back to hitlery.... she wants the president to withdraw all troops from Iraq before he leaves office. In other words, "she wants president Bush to SURRENDER before he leaves office".

I think the fight in Iraq is a good thing. I think we should stay there, because the terrorists have decided to fight us there. If we leave, they'll come right back here INTO America with another bombing or whatever. We'll just have to go right back over there SOMEWHERE and START ALL OVER AGAIN. Why not stay there, right where we've got a good start? Do the liberals REALLY BELIEVE that if we leave Iraq, the terrorist problem will just MAGICALLY go away? If you do.... heeeeerre's your picture....



The liberal "cut and run" strategy is a loser's strategy. We'll suffer far worse with that type of action by far, than standing and fighting these blood thirsty killers on their own soil, AWAY from America.

There WERE no terrorists fighting in Iraq before we deposed Saddam. He HATED the fundies.

She does't want Bush to "surrender". She wants him not to dump his mistakes on his successor. I think that's fair. The whole cut and run argument is disingenuous at best, intentionally inflammatory at worst. It is meant to create a barrier to discussion about the incompetence shown in the handling of every aspect of this misadventure.

[TheSage]

There WERE no terrorists fighting in Iraq before we deposed Saddam. He HATED the fundies.

She does't want Bush to "surrender". She wants him not to dump his mistakes on his successor. I think that's fair. The whole cut and run argument is disingenuous at best, intentionally inflammatory at worst. It is meant to create a barrier to discussion about the incompetence shown in the handling of every aspect of this misadventure.

But jillian, don't dems want to cut and run? What is their plan? Criticizing bush more is not a plan. Well, it's a plan, but not a plan for Iraq. Well, it's not a good plan for iraq, at the very least.

[retiredman]

But jillian, don't dems want to cut and run? What is their plan? Criticizing bush more is not a plan. Well, it's a plan, but not a plan for Iraq. Well, it's not a good plan for iraq, at the very least.

it never ceases to amaze me how republicans can continue to close their eyes, stick their fingers in their ears and scream at the top of their lungs "the democrats have no plan!"

[TheSage]

it never ceases to amaze me how republicans can continue to close their eyes, stick their fingers in their ears and scream at the top of their lungs "the democrats have no plan!"

So what is the democrat plan, besides getting bush to admit past failures, which is not a plan, for iraq.

[avatar4321]

it never ceases to amaze me how republicans can continue to close their eyes, stick their fingers in their ears and scream at the top of their lungs "the democrats have no plan!"

What are we closing our eyes to? we have a plan. In fact, its going quite well despite the media trying to make people think otherwise. Obviously the troops think its going well or we wouldnt have record reenlistment. Shouldnt they be the ones who can tell if we are doing well?

[retiredman]

So what is the democrat plan, besides getting bush to admit past failures, which is not a plan, for iraq.

I realize that I may not have articulated it HERE, but I have been asked that exact question dozens of times around the net....I give the plan... and republicans have one of two responses:

1. they pronounce that the democrats plan is either silly or won't work

or

2. they wait a few days and then complain that the democrats don't have a plan.

[retiredman]

What are we closing our eyes to? we have a plan. In fact, its going quite well despite the media trying to make people think otherwise. Obviously the troops think its going well or we wouldnt have record reenlistment. Shouldnt they be the ones who can tell if we are doing well?

if you are suggesting that we should let enlisted personnel in the armed forces have a veto power over our nation's foreign policy, I think that is absurd in the extreme.

34K Iraq civilians died violent deaths last year. Things are not going well. Gates says they are not going well. Petraeus said they are not going well...Bush said they are not going well..... Cheney and you and the rest of the stepford conservatives on here seem to think differently. Why am I not surprised?

[TheSage]

I realize that I may not have articulated it HERE, but I have been asked that exact question dozens of times around the net....I give the plan... and republicans have one of two responses:

1. they pronounce that the democrats plan is either silly or won't work

or

2. they wait a few days and then complain that the democrats don't have a plan.

Could you articulate it here please, for our benefit? Could you do us the honor?

[avatar4321]

if you are suggesting that we should let enlisted personnel in the armed forces have a veto power over our nation's foreign policy, I think that is absurd in the extreme.

34K Iraq civilians died violent deaths last year. Things are not going well. Gates says they are not going well. Petraeus said they are not going well...Bush said they are not going well..... Cheney and you and the rest of the stepford conservatives on here seem to think differently. Why am I not surprised?

No. Im saying the troops actions are far more determinative than the medias opinions in determining if something is working or not.

34K Iraq civilians arent being killed by American troops. They are being killed by the terrorists. How exactly is running away and letting the terrorists do what they want going to make less Iraqi citizens die??

If you actually cared about these people, youd be supporting the Presidents effort to kill the terrorists that are killing them.

[Gaffer]

if you are suggesting that we should let enlisted personnel in the armed forces have a veto power over our nation's foreign policy, I think that is absurd in the extreme.

34K Iraq civilians died violent deaths last year. Things are not going well. Gates says they are not going well. Petraeus said they are not going well...Bush said they are not going well..... Cheney and you and the rest of the stepford conservatives on here seem to think differently. Why am I not surprised?

Sure what would a bunch of enlisted men know about what's going on in iraq? Or fighting a war? Only officers would have any idea about such things. After all enlisted men are just ignorant morons with no education. bin kerry says so.

34k iraqi's died last year. If we pull out even more will die as the savages are turned loose. Too me that's just more dead muslims, which is a good thing. But for someone like you who is a muslim lover and so incensed that innocents are being killed should be completely against a pull out of the troops.