Why is a Nazi sympathizer our outgoing president?

And I am saying that Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld KNEW the intel was cherry-picked. They did the cherry picking. And even Colin Powell probably knew. And the cherry-picked intel was what was presented to congress. And while many democrats (not most though) voted for the resolution, it required many things to happen prior to military action. Most were not complied with.

From H J RES 114:

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to–

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

(b) PRESIDENTIAL DETERMINATION- In connection with the exercise of the authority granted in subsection (a) to use force the President shall, prior to such exercise or as soon thereafter as may be feasible, but no later than 48 hours after exercising such authority, make available to the Speaker of the House of Representatives and the President pro tempore of the Senate his determination that–

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic or other peaceful means alone either (A) will not adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq or (B) is not likely to lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to this joint resolution is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorist and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

So phrannie please tell me how Bush complied with this resolution when he stopped the weapons inspectors from fullfilling one of Iraq’s UN resolution requirements? How exactly did Bush include Iraq as “those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.” He was supposed to provide proof of Iraq’s complicity in 9/11.

So while an authorization to use force was passed, it came with conditions. Those conditions were not met, and Bush acted in violation of the H J RES 114.

“Iraq did much on their own to block UN inspections, if my memory serves me correctly…adding to the illusion that they had something to hide.”

You memory is not serving you correctly. Inspecotrs were back in Iraq in November of 2002. The inspectors reported minor obstruction by Iraqis at first, but by January were being given full access to any site, any time, with no warnings. On february 14th 2003 Hans Blix reported to the UN: “Since we arrived in Iraq, we have conducted more than 400 inspections covering more than 300 sites. All inspections were performed without notice, and access was almost always provided promptly. In no case have we seen convincing evidence that the Iraqi side knew in advance that the inspectors were coming.

In my 27 January update to the Council, I said that it seemed from our experience that Iraq had decided in principle to provide cooperation on process, most importantly prompt access to all sites and assistance to UNMOVIC in the establishment of the necessary infrastructure. This impression remains, and we note that access to sites has so far been without problems, including those that had never been declared or inspected, as well as to Presidential sites and private residences.”

Doesn’t sound like the inspector thought they were being blocked to me.

When did he use WMD on his own people?? Your blinded by your own hate for Bush. Ever hear of the gassing of the Kurds? The mass graves that were dug up, I certainly do.

Well it wasn’t just “Bush and Chaney” who “concocted” the evidence. You are so blinded by Bush Bashing. Lots of folks on the hill bought into the same “evidence” the President did. Christ what a revisionist memory you have.

Yes I do remember Valerie Plume. She sent her husband on the errand of investigating the yellow cake to discredit the administration. Yes I remember them, do you?

And yes I remember that English intelligence concurred with that of the CIA’s.

Re-read history, not just leftist diatribe.

phrannie & seao2florida, the Bush administration completely disregarded any information that was contrary to their pre-conceived notions on Iraqi WMDs. There were plenty of qualified people at the time who were saying the evidence is incomplete, and inaccurate, and were saying that there were none or very little WMDs in Iraq. And those who dared to question the intelligence were attacked unmericifully. Remember Joe WIlson & Valerie Plame? Remember how they attacked Scott Ritter, the former chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq. An expert that they rejected and attacked becasue he wouldn’t support the adminstrations cherry-picked intel. He was derided as unamerican for daring to say the president was wrong. Remember the downing street memos? So don’t give me your revisionists history of what happened.

The primary reason given to invade Iraq was because Saddam’s WMDs were an imminent threat to the US. If the threat was that imminent, why wasn’t anything found during the pre-war inspections? Why weren’t the inspectors allowed to finish their jobs?

Seao2florida, are really trying to say that Saddam moved his WMDs to syria? No one but extreme right wingers are even trying to peddle this nonsense anymore. We are talking about enough weapons to attak the US. Do you honestly think that amount of weapons could be moved without any trace? And why would he send his WMDs to syria at the very moment he would need them, when he was being attacked. It makes no sense, and that is why that theory was debunked immediately. I can’t believe you are still trying to suggest that happened.

“Hussein was an insane ruler who used “weapons of mass destruction” on his own people. “

When did he use those WMDs on his people? Did our invasion prevent more people from dying at his hands then were killed in the war? The bottom line is, Saddam was a despicable tyrant, but at the time of the invasion he was virtually powerless, and was not behaving in any way like he was in the 80s and 90s. He was being watched very closely, and was cooperating with inspectors at the time we invaded. If Bush had not started this war, hundreds of thousands of people would still be alive today.

“Does anyone remember Kerry? I voted for the war before I voted against it.”

Are you kidding me? You are still bringing this up. First off, it was not over the war, it was over funding for the war. Do you know how bills evolve? Different versions of bills are often brought to a vote before they are passed. The version Kerry voted for originally, Bush had said he would veto. That version did not pass, and the revised version that Kerry voted against did pass and Bush signed it. So it seems Bush was against the approriations bill before he was for it. See how silly that sounds.

“At any rate, they acted on the intelligence present at the time –Republican and Democrat alike.”

Sorry, but this is pure BS. The intel was not present, it was concocted. The nation was still under the fog of 9/11, and Bush used that to falsely claim a threat that never existed.

phrannie even though the kennedys might have been pro germany they didnt start wars for profits…GWB is frankly a power hungry idiot who has now stepped down from his “gods podium” (at last!) I actually believe we will be able to catch osama bin laden now, and things will get clearer about the state that the US is in right now…

heck if G.W was able to hide the most wanted terrorist of all time (he DID get the whole bin laden family out of the US on 09/12, a day after the name bin laden was announced) then his granddady would have had no problem hiding his shares of a nazi company, in the post modern informatiom period…I mean they were just ink at that time and no one would know very well who had the shares…

…as I said: that’s how Kennedy made his money :) I’m aware of the history. And yes, the Kennedy’s also had a stake (as many influential business people did) in companies leading up to nazi Germany & the 3rd reiche.

However, it’s fact that Prescott’s dealings were after Pearl Harbor. Not one, but three books on the subject.

And, it’s near impossible to trace the whole thing OR to find out how much money was involved :)

Last…Kennedy = not related to our current, outgoing president, nor a direct financial beneficiary of the current war. That’s Bush :)

If it was Clinton, Kennedy OR Obama that was minting money from the war in Iraq, I’d be outing them too.

I don’t believe that GW started the war in Iraq, for any other reason than he was misinformed about their weapons of mass destruction… At the time the war began, there were darn few in powerful positions that hadn’t also been “misinformed”…and believed what they had told…that would include Colon Powel and the Clintons.

Let’s see some links, or a book title, something proving that the GW made a personal bundle on the war…I’d be interested in seeing it.

p

George Bush “started the war” in Iraq for the sole reason of keeping weapons of mass destruction from being used on Americans. Information provided by the way by a Clinton appointed head of the CIA.

I do fault him for not guarding the porous borders of Syria where they may have been taken. Hussein was an insane ruler who used “weapons of mass destruction” on his own people. He had them and used them. Bush as others were advocates of this war. Does anyone remember Kerry? I voted for the war before I voted against it.

You must look at the information the politicians had at the time they made their decisions.

I do fault Bush and his military for not guarding the porous border. We might have more evidence. At any rate, they acted on the intelligence present at the time –Republican and Democrat alike.

Jimahl, all I have to do is read your first statement. A third grader would know you weren’t using that facetiously. You either can’t remember what happened or cherrypick your answers. And it is idiocy to try to say he did have them years before, so when we invaded he couldn’t have had them then.

There is no reason to go further. It’s kinda like your cherry picking, advising Jefferson, Washington and Adams were atheists as though it were an absolute. I’d have taken that on, but Phrannie did such a good job, it needed be ripped any further.

Go research your own history, and get off the single view, single purpose infomercials you’re watching.

And Jesus Jimahl, I had to go back 40-50 questions to find this, I answer and go on. go answer some of my responses you never have in the recent past.

“Jimahl, all I have to do is read your first statement. A third grader would know you weren’t using that facetiously. You either can’t remember what happened or cherrypick your answers.”

seao2florida, you are being very disingenous. This is what I said: > What was I refering to when I said 80s and 90s if it wasn’t Saddam’s history of using WMDs?

“And it is idiocy to try to say he did have them years before, so when we invaded he couldn’t have had them then. “

Was Scott Ritter being idiotic when he said Saddam did not have any WMDs? Was Has Blix being idiotic when he said that after three months of inspections, they had not found anything. It is pretty idiotic to suggest that anyone who believed Saddam didn’t have WMDs was unusual, when in fact HE DIDN’T HAVE ANY!!!

“There is no reason to go further.”

I am still waiting for some actual facts from you. I only here attacks at me, and nothing to refute what I am saying. Your debating skills leave much to be desired.

“It’s kinda like your cherry picking, advising Jefferson, Washington and Adams were atheists as though it were an absolute. I’d have taken that on, but Phrannie did such a good job, it needed be ripped any further.”

Pretty funny… This is how you debate? First off, I didn’t say they athiests. I said they weren’t christian. Most were deists. I do think Adams was kind of a christian, although he clearly had his suspicions about organized relgion. At least phrannie attempts debate, you just attack the messenger while ignoring the message.

Just answer me one question? Why weren’t UN inspectors allowed to finish if that is what we were demanding from Saddam all along?

Uh…If your statement is true…that was his grandfather…Not George W…You’d have to be careful going back generations…I mean, how’d the Kennedy’s make their money??? We had one them for president, too.

p

Kennedy = running alcohol during prohibition :) Far different story there.

I don’t equate running alcohol with helping finance the slaughter of hundreds of thousands, personally.

And the reason I bring it up is simple: the Bush family brothers have made tons of money from the current war. Isn’t that disgusting, and isn’t it something worthy of scrutiny?

As much as I think GW is a ‘friggin idiot, and I’m glad to see him go, I’m not ready to blame him for what his grandfather did.

Should his family have lost everything? Yes, but the shrub is not responsible for that misgiving.

Better read up on your history, Joe Kennedy was fired by Roosevelt as Ambassador to England because he was SO pro Germany…

George W’s daddy, was the youngest fighter pilot FIGHTING the Germans…

p

I posted a question regarding this months ago. There are a lot of answers there. :)

http://www.funadvice.com/q/shouldn_t_bush_finally_acknowledge

I think what seao2florida is saying…is that all those who BELIEVED the intellegence given at THAT time, voted to invade Iraq… The intellegence was in error, but enough believed that it was true (including 81 Dems in the House and 29 Senators) to pass H J RES 114 to use force against Iraq. Colon Powell believed it also…

Iraq did much on their own to block UN inspections, if my memory serves me correctly…adding to the illusion that they had something to hide.

p