46 Comments

• 1. neocon  |  February 10th, 2008 at 7:21 pm

  >>This is a failure. This is a failure. The troops have succeeded,…- Pelosi<<

  What she is in effect saying is that the Iraqis themselves are failures and she does not want to allow them anymore time to pull together their democracy, despite the fact that it took America several years of battles to get our democracy off the ground and nearly hundred years later we still fought a civil war.

  This is coming from someone who constantly lectures us on how we need to repair our international image. And I guess in her mind that includes calling our allies failures and abandoning them in their time of need. There is no one more incompetent than Pelosi, with the possible exception of Reid.

• 2. Kahn  |  February 10th, 2008 at 7:21 pm

  She was careful to praise the troops. Thats the tactic now among the elite (the rank and file wackos haven’t gotten that message yet).

  But she’s wrong.

  MEANWHILE:

  Actions against the military:

  Cambridge MA - No to Scouts wanting to collect soap and sundries for the Troops

  San Francisco CA- No to Marine urban warfare training

  Oakland CA- US troops denied permission to deplane after a long flight

  San Francisco CA- No to Marine silent drill team filming for a commercial

  Berkeley CA- City sponsored harassment of US Marines

  Toledo OH- No to Marine urban warfare training

  Rockville MD- Vandalism attack on Air Force Recruiting station

  Olympia WA- Sabotaging rail lines leading to United States military facilities

  Famous Quotes:
  Congressman David Obey: Iraq violence is down because everyone is dead
  Compiled from several sources, hat tip to Powerline

  Harry Reid (on “the surge”):
  Now I believe, myself, that the secretary of state, the secretary of defense and you have to make your own decision as to what the president knows: that this war is lost, that the surge is not accomplishing anything.

  Dick Durbin (on Guantanamo):
  If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags, or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings. Sadly, that is not the case. This was the action of Americans in the treatment of their prisoners.

  Hillary Clinton (to General Petraeus):
  [T]oday you are testifying about the current status of our policy in Iraq and the prospects of that policy. It is a policy that you have been ordered to implement by the president. And you have been made the de facto spokesmen for what many of us believe to be a failed policy.

  Despite what I view as your rather extraordinary efforts in your testimony both yesterday and today, I think that the reports that you provide to us really require the willing suspension of disbelief.

  John Kerry:
  Education — if you make the most of it and you study hard and you do your homework, and you make an effort to be smart, you can do well. If you don’t, you get stuck in Iraq.

  John Kerry:
  And there is no reason, Bob, that young American soldiers need to be going into the homes of Iraqis in the dead of night, terrorizing kids and children, you know, women, breaking sort of the customs of the — of — the historical customs, religious customs.

  Charles Schumer (on “the surge”):
  [L]et me be clear, the violence in Anbar has gone down despite the surge, not because of the surge. The inability of American soldiers to protect these tribes from al Qaeda said to these tribes we have to fight al Qaeda ourselves. It wasn’t that the surge brought peace here. It was that the warlords took peace here, created a temporary peace here.

  Charles Rangel:
  If there’s anyone who believes that these youngsters want to fight, as the Pentagon and some generals have said, you can just forget about it. No young, bright individual wants to fight just because of a bonus and just because of educational benefits. And most all of them come from communities of very, very high unemployment. If a young fellow has an option of having a decent career or joining the Army to fight in Iraq, you can bet your life that he would not be in Iraq.

  John Murtha (on Haditha):
  It’s much worse than reported in Time magazine. There was no fire fight. There was no IED that killed these innocent people. Our troops overreacted because of the pressure on them and they killed innocent civilians in cold blood. And that’s what the report is going to tell.

  Edward Kennedy:
  Shamefully, we now learn that Saddam’s torture chambers reopened under new management: U.S. management.

  Barack Obama (on Afghanistan):
  We’ve got to get the job done there and that requires us to have enough troops so that we’re not just air-raiding villages and killing civilians, which is causing enormous pressure over there.

• 3. NeoClown  |  February 10th, 2008 at 8:19 pm

  Iraq is beautiful in the spring.
  A whole gang of us are going to raft down the Tigris this March.
  If any of you guys want to go, let me know.

• 4. neocon  |  February 10th, 2008 at 8:23 pm

  The comments and talking points from the left become fewer and less relevant as time goes on and conditions improve in Iraq. Pelosi and Reid are, however, just dumb enough to perpetuate the tired old party line. God bless both of them, they have helped the Republicans more than they know.

• 5. Kahn  |  February 10th, 2008 at 8:43 pm

  NeoClown,

  Have fun. Be sure to wear this shirt.

  http://www.ustacticalsupply.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=505

  But tell them you hate Bush, that will make the difference.

• 6. Casper  |  February 10th, 2008 at 8:56 pm

  Actually neoclown, you might want to try the fishing instead.

  http://www.anglersnet.co.uk/authors/elton65.htm

• 7. JD  |  February 10th, 2008 at 9:20 pm

  She calls Iraq a failure because that is what it is. We never should have initiated the invasion in the first place. The legislative and executive branches of our government failed US by proceeding with misguided plans of middle east domination.

• 8. keefer  |  February 10th, 2008 at 9:34 pm

  A whole gang of us are going to raft down the Tigris this March.

  Good, take Casspurr with you. Hopefully, you’ll eventually star in one of those videos…

• 9. Casper  |  February 10th, 2008 at 10:07 pm

  Keefer,
  Thanks for caring, but I already have plans for the summer.

• 10. Kahn  |  February 10th, 2008 at 10:16 pm

  JD, yah. Getting two countries to stop building the nukes they were going to blow up New York City with sucks.

• 11. keefer  |  February 10th, 2008 at 10:20 pm

  Thanks for caring, but I already have plans for the summer.

  Working on Hillbama’s campaign, no doubt…

• 12. Casper  |  February 10th, 2008 at 10:29 pm

  “Working on Hillbama’s campaign, no doubt…”

  No, taking classes. repairing wind damage, teaching summer school, finding the best ways to turn young minds toward the dark side of the force (Luke, I am your father). You know, a normal summer.

  I might even get a chance to travel on a wagon train for a while (for real).

• 13. Kahn  |  February 10th, 2008 at 11:12 pm

  Casper - actually, I’ve heard from some Marine friends that the duck hunting would be really good in parts of Iraq. One of Sadaam’s sons had an extensive gun collection (can’t remember which). There were lots of shotguns and he was supposed to hunt duck a lot. Lots of marshes in the south and even elsewhere.

  Just like anywhere, you don’t really get a feel for a place from pictures and TV.

• 14. Kahn  |  February 10th, 2008 at 11:17 pm

  A friend of mine who visits there monthly brought me one of these patches a while back. There is normal life, a sense of duty, and more in Iraq. Again, we see such a narrow view in the press.

  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GZC_IraqiScouts/

  Boy Scouts and Girl Guides of Iraq
  International Zone, Baghdad

• 15. Casper  |  February 10th, 2008 at 11:46 pm

  Kahn,
  My daughter’s boyfriend did a lot of fishing while he was in Iraq. He said it really wasn’t that bad. He is a big time fisherman and wants to take me deep sea fishing the next time I get out to Oregon to visit. While I’m not much into fishing myself, I would love to give it a try.

• 16. Baxter  |  February 10th, 2008 at 11:56 pm

  Saddam no longer invading other countries killing tens of thousands of people with WMD’s and other weapons he purchased around the world.(the US did not sell Saddamd WMD’s like liberals like to lie about,we sold him a grand total of a little over 5 million in hardware. The bio samples sent to colleges and bio labs were supposed to be used for making cures and other experiments.These types of transactions are made by most countries around the world to other countries on a daily basis,Saddam chose to use them for murder and war so don’t try the tired liberal line of “but we sold him the weapons”.Your liberal friends in the UN (USSR,France,China,Brazil,Denmark,are some of the countries well ahead in these arm sales.The US only made up 0.46% of these sales)sold Saddam the lions share of these weapons and also helped him with the oil for food scam.
  Saddam is 100% responsible for his decision to commits acts of war,we stopped him.

  Pelosi calls this a failure.

  Saddam no longer allowed to commit genocide on a
  scale of killing 600,000 to 1.2 million of his own people with WMD’s, torture and murder rooms.

  Pelosi calls this a failure

  Saddam denied the ability to reconstitute his WMD
  programs after the failure of UN Weapons inspectors
  to detect and rid the country of this ability.(Duelfer report,2003 senate intelligence report and Saddam’s
  own words verify that he still maintained the ability
  to start his WMD program after the weapons inspectors would have left.)

  Pelosi calls this a failure

  Iraqis coming together,sunni,shia,and kurd to assemble an army,police force.Together to provide
  citizen watch groups that patrol and help the Us/Iraqi army defeat al-qaeda terrorist and rouge
  militia’s.Iraqi’s coming together politically with
  Baathist reform,sharing oil revenues,opening businesses side by side,refugees returning home,and
  finding ways to live and get past sectarian divides and violence.

  Pelosi calls this a failure

  More than 60% of Iraq has participated in free elections and voted in a government that represents
  the people and a constitution.Freedom this country
  has never seen.

  Pelosi calls this a failure

  Women are now allowed to participate in government and with the rejection of shaira law, that will grow stronger as the Iraqi people enjoy the fruits of there freedom over time.The freedom of religion and discrimination of women will subside as they have done here and other countries that had to
  endure the growing pains of a free society.

  Pelosi calls this a failure

  Hospitals,Schools,parks,and other necessary infrastructure are being built and made available to
  all Iraqis instead of just Baghdad and the Sunni triangle.Millions of children have returned to school
  that were not able to go under Saddam.Iraq was even able to participate in a national soccer tournament without fear of Saddam’s sons killing them if they did not win.

  Pelosi calls this a failure

  No more money for suicide bombers,terrorist training camps and special housing for some of the
  most dangerous terrorist in the world.

  Pelosi calls this a failure

  Tens of thousands of al-qaeda terrorist killed and
  more than 80% of their leadership destroyed,in
  prison( giving the west intelligence that has saved thousands of innocent lives)or in a cave watching their dreams of the caliphate crash down around them.

  Pelosi calls this a failure

  You would be hard pressed to find a better example of selling out your country,our military,the
  prevention of genocide,expansion of terrorism and
  proliferation of WMDs,and the rights of people to live in freedom for the political ambitions of liberals and
  their desire to win senate seats and the white house.

  Pelosi and the liberal party she represents,are showing the world they care more about their own
  political ambitions then they do about defeating terrorist and dictators that would kill,rape,and torture to deny people to live freely.

  One Soldier has done more for the spread of Freedom around the world than all the liberal activists combined.

• 17. NeoClown  |  February 11th, 2008 at 12:49 am

  Here we are getting in some high diving practice before our rafting trip.

  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yWkZSdOBpBU&feature=related

• 18. TiredofLibBullShit  |  February 11th, 2008 at 6:47 am

  Casper, deep sea fishing is the best experience. I am not a fisherman myself, but take advantage of opportunities when they arise. I fished in the Gulf of Mexico awhile back. The best places to go there were around the offshore drilling platforms, which form natural reefs. We’d fish for Amberjack, a great tasting fish. I don’t know what is around Oregon but don’t pass up the opportunity.

  ————-

  Back on topic. It’s hard to be successful with this crowd in the House and Senate when they keep moving the bar.

• 19. eric  |  February 11th, 2008 at 9:26 am

  Baxter,
  Don’t confuse the issue with facts. Clearly, if one ignores all of the positive things that have arisen out of this horrific conflict, then it is a complete and utter failure.

• 20. js  |  February 11th, 2008 at 10:18 am

  The real failure was that we went for 8 long Clinton years allowing violation after violation of the cease fire agreement Saddam and Iraq submitted too, and waited 8 long years to stop it. All of that went on while Saddam left the people of Iraq to starve, while he slaughter tens of thousands for opposing his rule, and allowed half of a million children to die of dysentary so he could make a political statement against UN Sanctions.

  The most insulting part about it was, he did this all while squandering billions in pet projects through importing illegal materials into the country to do it.

  Ya, that was a failure, Bush did what Clinton should have done years before. Billary and Hillary, sure glad they lost!!

• 21. Sunny  |  February 11th, 2008 at 10:56 am

  The purpose of the surge was to create a secure time for the government of Iraq to make the political change to bring reconciliation to Iraq,” Pelosi said on CNN’s “Late Edition.” “They have not done that.”

  Not being a Pelosi fan, I do believe that what she said is true. I do not see the Iraqi government making much progress in getting their act together. She did praise the troops, which Matt failed to mention, but that is to be expected. How long are we suppose to keep supporting this government before we demand that they do their job? How many more billions should be spend before we let them rule their own people? I think the Democratic Party has very weak leadership in both the House and Senate, but try to keep their remarks in context and honest.

• 22. Martin  |  February 11th, 2008 at 11:22 am

  “Unless Pelosi is rooting for the terrorists to win, I can’t understand why she thinks Iraq is a failure.”

  Maybe that’s because you aren’t heading over there for your fifth tour of duty right now.

• 23. Darva Conger  |  February 11th, 2008 at 12:52 pm

  The surge provided the ‘window of opportunity’ for the Iraqi government to do practically nothing to unite that country.

  How can you call this success?

• 24. eric  |  February 11th, 2008 at 1:07 pm

  Maybe Madame Speaker should read this:
  http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/iraq/article3346386.ece

  One snippet from the article:
  Al-Qaeda in Iraq faces an “extraordinary crisis”. Last year’s mass defection of ordinary Sunnis from al-Qaeda to the US military “created panic, fear and the unwillingness to fight”. The terrorist group’s security structure suffered “total collapse”.

  These are the words not of al-Qaeda’s enemies but of one of its own leaders in Anbar province — once the group’s stronghold. They were set down last summer in a 39-page letter seized during a US raid on an al-Qaeda base near Samarra in November.

• 25. Sunny  |  February 11th, 2008 at 2:00 pm

  js | February 11th, 2008 at 10:18 am
  The real failure was that we went for 8 long Clinton years allowing violation after violation of the cease fire agreement Saddam and Iraq submitted too, and waited 8 long years to stop it.

  Of course - I almost forgot, its Bill Clinton’s fault! Never mind that there were violations during Bush I administration, and the UN was involved in containing Saddam. That absolutly does not matter - it is Clintions fault. I promise you, had it not been for September 11, 2001, Bush II would have never done anything about it either. The attack on the WTC merely gave this administration an opportunity to attack Iraq without road blocks from the American people and congress. It was the opportunity Cheney had just waited for. But, lest i forget, it was Clintion’s fault.

• 26. Dennis  |  February 11th, 2008 at 4:07 pm

  Baxter says: “Saddam no longer invading other countries killing tens of thousands of people with WMD’s”

  Saddam Hussein invaded just one country - Kuwait - and that only after being made to believe by US ambassador April Glaspie that it would be okay with the US if he did. As for killing all those tens of thousands, we put Saddam Hussein out of business and took over the killing ourselves.

  After the all the “shock and awe” killing, we continued blowing families away at checkpoints because they didn’t understand English or our hand signals. And of course the methodical killing of innocent people continued as the war ground onward.

  There also is the wholesale killing by proxy the US unleashed by leaving Saddam’s ammo dumps unguarded and allowing thousands of tons of high-velocity explosives to disappear into the hands of insurgents. We bear direct moral responsibility for this continued killing, since it was both predictable and avoidable.

  Lest we forget, the US military has scattered hundreds of tons of depleted uranium munitions across Iraq which will continue killing Iraqi civilians for decades to come. Depleted uranium meets the US government’s own definition of weapons of mass destruction - and are illegal under all international treaties, conventions and agreements, as well as US military law. see http://www.mindfully.org/Nucs/2004/DU-Trojan-Horse1jul04.htm

  We continue hearing how evil Saddam was for all his killing, but somehow the US is righteous for doing the same, because all our killing is for this utopian figment of imagination called “spreading democracy” in the Middle East. The moral smugness of this pretense is insufferable. Killing for theoretical utopian objectives is murder, pure and simple.

  Blown up bodies and exploded flesh don’t know the difference between Saddam’s killing or anyone else’s. Ask the writhing and the dying if they care who did it. Ask the amputees, the eyeless, the motherless or the grieving if it feels better somehow because the Americans did this instead of Saddam Hussein. The end result is a zero sum.

  In fact things are arguably worse than a zero sum, since Iraqis have lost not only hundreds of thousands of human lives but their economy, their security and the integration of their religious and ethnic populations for the foreseeable future. Furthermore America’s enemy du jour, Iran, has been strengthened along with militant Islamists all over the Middle East. Last but by no means least, a no-win situation has been created for the United States where any subsequent president will have intractible global problems to deal with that never existed before this war.

  The immensely hypocritical and morally relativistic rationalizations offered for the Iraq war are appalling to anyone with a shred of genuine respect for the value of human life.

• 27. Buddy  |  February 11th, 2008 at 7:07 pm

  Respect for Human lives….
  20,000+ murdered each year
  800,00 aggravated assualts
  9.9 million property crime
  450,00 forcible rapes

  And these are just the reported numbers

  No not Iraq, this is life in the USA
  When the anti-war talk about respect for human life, they tend to not talk about liberal justice system that allows murders, rapists, peadaphiles and other criminals repeat the same offenses over and over again.

  They tend not to talk about the various parts of US cities that are controlled by gangs, which make them no go zones.

  Maybe ibstead of criticizing Bush and anyone else about Iraq, maybe the should put just as much effort into criticizing their local, state and federal governments for lack of ‘genuine respect fot the value of human life”, right here in the USA

• 28. Kahn  |  February 11th, 2008 at 7:39 pm

  Dennis, Iran? You never heard of that war? I’m sick of educating you idiots.

• 29. eric  |  February 11th, 2008 at 7:45 pm

  Kahn,
  No you’re not. You must enjoy educating the idiots (and some of us who aren’t idiots). You do it enough. Besides, a little education might lead to a little enlightenment.

• 30. Dennis  |  February 11th, 2008 at 8:56 pm

  Khan - technically you are correct but Iraq’s invasion happened at the encouragement of the US and quickly settled into a long war of attrition It is hardly remembered as a war of conquest, as Kuwait was.

  My larger point was/is that Saddam is demonized for doing things that US also did, either using proxies or with the fanciful justification of utopian schemes. If in the end the human cost is the same, there is no moral high ground to claim.

  In regard to Baxter’s post regarding Saddam’s dangerousness - “invading other countries killing tens of thousands of people with WMD’s” - both Condi Rice in her capacity as Natl Security Advisor and Colin Powell unequivocally said Iraq didn’t even pose a threat to its own neighbors after its war with Iran petered out and years of sanctions.

• 31. Christian Wright  |  February 11th, 2008 at 10:34 pm

  Deleted - off topic

• 32. Dennis  |  February 12th, 2008 at 12:23 am

  Funny that Christian Wright’s relevant observation was deleted for being “off topic” while Khan’s non-response to my post (26) was retained.

  Khan completely stepped around my main point to argue with a technicality - thus his remark was actually off topic. Of course if he gets to call someone an idiot, that scores points here.

  Fact: Iraq was not a threat to any other nation when the US went to war with it; nobody can defend the morality of the Iraq war based on net lives saved/lost (my post), or by any strategic advantage gained by the US going to war there (the gist of Christian Wright’s post, deleted).

  Khan, there is no “spread of freedom” resulting from the Iraq war - in the best of all possible worlds there will only a lessening of the terror that has blossomed from it. The only way the Iraq war can be defended is by appealing to some pie-in-the-sky utopian schema. That is hardly the ground of traditional conservatism - you guys are waaaay out there.

• 33. Baxter  |  February 12th, 2008 at 4:33 am

  “Iraq was not a threat to any other nation when the
  US invaded it.”
  Dennis,
  Great, we have super intelligent foreign policy advice from someone who didn’t even know Saddam went to war and invaded Iran for 8 yrs. Your topic of “Saddam was not a threat,the US is the real monster.” has been addressed over and over for years.

  When you liberals figure out how nations can fight a war without civilian casualties(especially from an enemy that hides among civilians)the world is waiting for your wisdom.So far liberals like dennis have been big on complaining and monday morning quarterbacking and real short on Solutions and placing the responsibility of Dictators and terrorists
  actions where they belong, on the real enemy,Saddam and the Jihadist.Dennis and his liberal friends war on Bush have accomplished nothing but dividing this nation and hurting Bush’s
  poll numbers.Congratulations Dennis.

  Your song and dance about Saddam not being a threat does not seem to match the voices of the
  worlds intelligence and the leaders of this country:

  “Iraq is a long way form 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.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.”
  Nancy Pelosi, Dec.16,1998

  “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 from Sen.BOB Graham and other democrats. Dec.5,2001

  “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 Kerry, Oct.9,2002

  “The risks that the leader of a rogue state can use
  biological or chemical weapons on us or our allies is
  the greatest security risk we face.”

  Madeline Albright,Feb.18,1998

  Dennis, your liberal leadership did not carry your
  “Saddam is not a threat” fairy tale.
  Should Bush have listened to elected leadership and
  experts in foreign affairs or a super intelligent defender of terrorist dictators like you?

  Maybe we should hear form some more our elected officials that seem to have acquired the biggest case
  of amnesia concerning their stance on the war in Iraq this nation has ever seen:

  “But this isn’t just a future threat. Saddam’s existing biological and chemical weapons capabilities pose a very real threat to America.”

  Sen. John Rockefeller,speech
  delivered on Senate floor 2002.

  “It was reasonable to conclude that Iraq posed an
  Imminent threat. What we learned during the inspection made Iraq a more dangerous place potentially than,in fact, we thought it was even before the war.”
  David Kay testimony to Sen.
  Intel. Committee 1/28/04

  “If Iraq could acquire this material from abroad(uranium,he already had more than a ton of it)the CIA estimates that it could have a nuclear weapon within one year.”

  Sen. John Kerry,10/09/02

  “Any -false statements or omissions- in it’s Dec. declaration were, according to Resolution 1441, supposed to “constitute a further material breach of Iraq’s obligations.” and “material breach” is the Security Council’s standard for measuring whether military force is required to compel disarmament.”

  David Kay, Jan. 19, 2003

  more experts confirming how dangerous Saddam
  was and the right to use force to disarm him.
  D@mn dennis, your”Saddam was not a threat”line
  is leaving you waaaaay out there. But you know more than Kerry,Albright,Kay and the rest of the liberals that went on and on about the dangers of Saddam.
  Maybe it would be make more sense hearing it from our enemies.:

  “We will chase Americans to every corner at all times.No high tower of steel will protect them against the fire of truth.”
  Saddam Hussein,Iraq News agency

  “Does America realize the meaning of every Iraqi becoming a missile that can cross to countries and cities?”
  Saddam Hussein, Sept.4, 1994

  “Our striking arm will reach(America,Britain)
  before they know what hit them.”

  Dennis calls this Saddam not being a threat to America.Like Hitler was not a threat to the jews
  when he was spewing threatening claims of annihilation.

  But,But,But …we didn’t find any WMD’s(The world only knew that after we had 130,000 sets of boots
  on the ground):

  Saddam Hussein initially didn’t think the US would
  invade to destroy weapons of mass destruction, so
  he kept the fact that he had none a secret to prevent an Iranian invasion he believed could happen.(revealed to George Pero,FBI agent assigned
  to interrogate Saddam).

  “He told me he initially miscalculated…President
  Bush’s intentions.He thought the United States would retaliate with the same type of attack as we did in 1998.. a four day aerial attack.”

  Saddam still wouldn’t admit he had no weapons of mass destruction, even when it was obvious there
  would be military action against him because of the
  perception he did. Because ,says Piro,”for him, it was critical that he was seen as still the strong, defiant Saddam.He thought that would prevent the Iranians from reinvading Iraq.” he tells Piro.

  HE ALSO INTENDED AND HAD THE WHEREWITHAL
  TO RESTART THE WEAPONS PROGRAM.”SADDAM STILL HAD THE ENGINEERS. THE FOLKS THAT HE NEEDED TO RECONSTITUTE HIS PROGRAM ARE STILL THERE.” SAYS PIRO. “HE WANTED TO PURSUE ALL OF WMD… TO RECONSTITUTE HIS ENTIRE WMD
  PROGRAM.” PIRO SAYS.

  Saddam has killed hundreds of thousands of people with WMD’s and made it clear he wanted to attack
  his enemies world wide and Dennis sees know danger here at all.

  Dennis has to have his head pretty far up Rosie’s a$$ to come up with his liberal drivel.

  ” Dr. kay’s team has established that the Iraqi regime had the production capacity and the know how to produce a great deal more chemical and biological weaponry when international economic sanctions were lifted.”
  Iraq Survey Group,Sept. 2004

  “According to people familiar with the 1,500 page
  report, the head of the Iraq Survey Group,charles
  Duelfer, will find that Saddam was importing banned
  materials,working on unmanned aerial vehicles in violation of UN agreements and maintaining a dual-use industrial sector that could produce weapons.
  Duelfer also says Iraq only had small research and
  development programs for chemical and biological weapons, but concludes Saddam had intentions of
  restarting weapons programs at some point,after
  suspicion and inspections from the international community waned.

  Associated Press,Sept. 17,2004

  Dennis your pathetic attempts to defend the rights
  of dictators and terrorist to kill and threaten America
  just so you can pump up your little war on Bush make you the one that has no respect for human life.

  I think your hero Bill Clinton said this well:

  “The hard fact is that so long as Saddam Hussein is in power he threatens the well-being of his people, the peace of the region, the security of the world. the best way to end that threat once and for all, is
  with a new Iraqi government ready to live in Peace….”

  We have provided the Iraqi and the Afghani people this with the leadership of President
  Bush and the American Solider and I am proud to support it.

• 34. Dennis  |  February 12th, 2008 at 9:29 pm

  Lots of words to say nothing new. As for calling me “someone who didn’t even know Saddam went to war and invaded Iran for 8 yrs” you are quite wrong. I characterized the Iran-Iraq war as one of attrition because the invasion (at the encouragement of the US) was abortive and turned very quickly into a stalemate. So we are arguing over semantics.

  I was acutely aware of the Iran-Iraq war, having spent months in Iran prior to the revolution and at the time having close family friends (including my daughter’s pediatrician) who were Iraqis.

  Prior to 9/11 both Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice made clear that Saddam Hussein was no threat — to America, Europe or the Middle East. He was mainly a threat to his internal political enemies. Were Bush’s nat’l security advisor and secretary of state both wrong?

  Nothing changed Iraq’s inherent dangerousness after 9/11 - it was all a matter of cherry picking statements and drumming up war hysteria. Your post is full of cherry picked statements - I’ve heard them all a thousand times and the whole leaden mass of them will never change the actual facts. Saddam Hussein was depleted, worn out and demoralized by years of sanctions. And George Bush, Dick Cheney and Don Rumsfeld (and the rest of the neoconservative crowd) were hot to go to war - for any reason or none at all.

  You can spin it any way you want - it actually is cowardice and blind nationalistic fervor that sacrifices Constitutional principles and international law to make war against others who have made no aggression against us, as Iraq did not. America’s founders would have called this what it is - utter folly, if not treason - the fact that you are proud of such makes further words between us of little point.

• 35. Dennis  |  February 12th, 2008 at 10:23 pm

  Addendum to Baxter - a courtesy, since you seem unaware of the following quotes:

  February 24 2001; Colin Powell in Cairo, Egypt: “He [Saddam Hussein] has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbours.”

  May 2001, Colin Powell: [Saddam Hussein has not been able to] “build his military back up or to develop weapons of mass destruction” for “the last 10 years”.

  July 2001, Condoleezza Rice: “Saddam does not control the northern part of the country. We are able to keep his arms from him. His military forces have not been rebuilt.”

  Two months later - September 11, 2001 according to notes taken by his aides, Rumsfeld says he wants to “hit” Iraq, even though no evidence existed that Saddam Hussein had anything to do with attacks on US. “Go massive… Sweep it all up. Things related and not.”

• 36. Baxter  |  February 12th, 2008 at 10:45 pm

  Dennis,

  Your own words in your previous post stated that
  Saddam had only invaded one country, Kuwait.For
  you to come back after having being called out for this idiotic statement and try to act like it had nothing to do with the point of Saddam waging war in the region at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives only further shows your lack of credibility on this subject.

  Using facts to show your ignorance of what you
  are talking about is not cherry picking.If you can
  disprove the statements and conclusions of the elected officials,intelligence agencies,and committees
  that were established before Bush took office and after concerning Iraq please do,but holding your hands over your ears and yelling “I don’t believe you,
  Bush lied ” is not going to get it.
  You dismissing facts that plainly show that many democrats and the intelligence showed Saddam to be a threat to the region and his enemies abroad does not strengthen your point, it only shows you to
  be the typical left winger that shouts the same things over and over to prove a point instead of using facts,and the reality of the situation on the ground.

  The world is better off without Saddam in power
  in Iraq .
  Your defense of him is pathetic and idiotic.

  By the way genius, How’s that impeachment going?

• 37. Baxter  |  February 12th, 2008 at 10:54 pm

  Looking at the testimony Powell gave at the UN,it appears further intelligence must have changed his mind.You know like the NIE’s of the last few years
  talking about Iran building a bomb then doing a 180′ turn and stating the program has stopped.
  Your quotes mean nothing compared to Powell’s testimony in the UN and this still does nothing to dis-spell the fact that the majority of the worlds intelligence agencies,our government,and our intelligence agencies say Saddam was a threat that needed to be eliminated.
  There was no smoke and mirrors here,the resolution to go to war that Democrats and Republicans voted on lays out the case in detail.
  My earlier post shows this in detail,can you refute the words and conclusions of democrats, Republicans,and our intelligence agencies and show that Bush lied this nation into war or not.

• 38. Baxter  |  February 12th, 2008 at 11:52 pm

  Top Democrats still would have voted for war.
  Associated press July 31, 2004

  Koppel of ABC’s nightline reported:”We wanted to see whether the conclusions reached by the intelligence Committee would have made any difference to the other Senators who voted to authorize war in Iraq,so we called them.

  Of the 42 we reached, only three said they would have changed their minds had they known then “what they know now.”

  Instead of worrying about why Powell changed direction and went to the UN with the case for war,
  maybe you should explain how your liberal heroes have flip flopped and changed their minds so much.
  They still thought going into Iraq was right even
  after the 2003 Senate Intelligence report came out.

  I guess their political survival was more important
  than supporting the men and women they sent to war against the jihadist.

  The Bipartisan Senate Select committee Report on the US Intelligence Community’s Prewar Inelligence Assessments on Iraq found no evidence of political pressure to change the intellignece community’s judgments related to Iraq’s weapons programs.

  Conclusion 83:The Committee did not find any evidence that Administration officals attempted to coerce,influence or pressure analysts to change their judgments related to Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction capabilities.

  Conclusion 84: The committee found no evidence that the Vice Presidents visits to the CIA were attempts to pressure analysts, were perceived as intended to pressure analysts by those who participated in the briefings on Iraq’s weapon’s of mass destruction programs, of did pressure analysts to change their assessments.

  Democrats and Republicans found in this Senate 2003 Intelligence report that Bush did not lie,plain and simple.
  I know john stewart does not talk about this but it
  is the facts.

  British Butler Report found no evidence of deliberate distortion:

  449: In general, we found that the original intelligence material was correctly reported in (Joint
  Intelligence Committee)assessments. An exception was the ‘45 minute report. But this sort of example was rare in the several hundred JIC assessments we
  read on Iraq. In genral, we also found that the reliability of the original intelligence reports was fairly represented by the use of accompanying qualifications. We should record in particular that we
  found no evidence of deliberate distortion or of culpable negligence.

  Another objective assessments by the British that
  the prewar evidence was not manipulated and that
  Bush and Blair did not lie.

  The 9/11 commission also found that Bush did not
  manipulate or distort intelligence.Everything except
  a few documents that the intelligence agencies requested not be released was available for all
  Democrats and Republicans to see.

  This is hard evidence that rebukes the “Bush lied”
  rant from liberals and enforces the opinions of
  Congress and our Intelligence agencies of the threat
  that Saddam posed.

  Remember Dennis, it was your Democratic heroes
  that killed Kucinich’s impeachment bill,not Republicans.We would love to remind the Nation
  how strong a case for war was made by the democrats over the last 14 years.

  The only lying and spinning that has been going on
  about Iraq has been coming from liberal democrats
  the past 5 years.If Bush has committed all the crimes liberals cry and whine about,then why did
  their elected heroes take impeachment off the table
  as soon as they got power in 06′.
  PUT UP OR SHUT UP LIBERAL,YOU HAVE THE CONGRESS,IMPEACH OR QUIT YOUR WHINNYING.

• 39. Dennis  |  February 13th, 2008 at 12:06 am

  Deleted - off topic

• 40. Dennis  |  February 13th, 2008 at 12:42 am

  Deleted for being …blah, blah, blah a mindless rehash of issues from 2003-2004. Its 2008. Get with the program…

• 41. Dennis  |  February 13th, 2008 at 2:16 am

  Huh?

  I thought this thread was about the Iraq war…

  And just what IS your putative “program”?

  But thanks for not repeating your lie about being “off topic.” You ought to correct yourself about that previous deletion too, ya think?

• 42. Direction Road Travel Uk&hellip  |  March 24th, 2008 at 1:52 am

  Direction Road Travel Uk

  I was searching for ‘%KEYWORD%’ at google and got this your post (’%TITLE%’) in search results. Not very relevant result, but still interesting to read :)

• 43. Sell House Uk&hellip  |  March 31st, 2008 at 4:26 am

  Sell House Uk

  I have to say, that I could not agree with you in 100%, but it’s just my opinion, which could be wrong.

• 44. Samples Of Business Plans&hellip  |  March 31st, 2008 at 1:31 pm

  Samples Of Business Plans

  I enjoyed reading your blog. It is so interesting reading other peoples personal take on a subject.

• 45. Madisson&hellip  |  April 4th, 2008 at 4:39 am

  Madisson

  It would be great help if I could get some clarity on the real issues

• 46. clip free gay male sex vi&hellip  |  April 21st, 2008 at 9:32 am

  gay ilets martinique trois

  gayatri joshi pictures