Bush told the truth on WMD and liberals make excuses Do you find this Humorous?

Answer 1

It does not suprise me at all.

The Liberals hate Bush so much that hating Bush is their religion, I am not even kidding, it's like they have formed the Church of I Hate Bush.

What really gets me is Clinton and other Democrats all said Saddam had WMDs before Bush was ever President and I was like if Bush lied then did he make a phone call to The White House when he was Governor of Texas and say "Hey Clinton lie about WMDs for me will ya?"

I do not think Bush would have ever done that while Governor of Texas.

Then again the Democrats act like they never said Saddam had WMDs and Bush made the whole thing up and now the proof is strong that Bush told the Truth and the Democrats are still not willing to smell reality.

My own Democratic Governor the Canadian born Jennifer Granholm went over to Iraq and saw for herself the positives but did not wanna admit to Bush having been right all along.

Answer 2

Didn't Bush say that Saddam was actively pursuing chemical, biological, and "nuculer" weapons?

From Fox News:
A senior Defense Department official, however, made the following clarifications:

• These findings do not reflect a WMD capacity that was built up after 1991.
• These are not the WMDs this country and the rest of the world believed Iraq had.
• These are not the WMDs for which this country went to war.

What I find humorous is people who listen to the 10-second sound byte, and not the "rest of the story".

Answer 3

Did Bush tell the whole truth? Did he tell you about Rayguns and Rumsfeld and Hussein? If he didn't let me correct the oversight.


July 1984: CIA begins giving Iraq intelligence necessary to calibrate its mustard gas attacks on Iranian troops. (1)

July, 1991: The Financial Times of London reveals that a Florida chemical company had produced and shipped cyanide to Iraq during the 80's using a special CIA courier. Cyanide was used extensively against the Iranians. (2)

History did not begin 9/11/01. The US set the Butcher of Baghdad up at his popstand and gave him chemical and biological agents and the technology to weaponize the agents. Ever see the photo of Rummy shaking Hussein's hand with warm smiles all around? Ever hear of the US blocking the UN from dealing with Iraq and its WMDs in March of 1986? As soon as the "chemical fingerprints" of these WMDs begin to point back to the USA the matter will be dropped.

Answer 4

Bush did not tell the truth. The situation is not humorous. I believe that Bush and the people around him felt this war would solve a lot of problems: Oil price reduction or stabilization, security for Israel, elimination of a monster in power. But, Bush and company were ill informed about the people in the area and fell into a trap. There is now no good answer. Iraq is a country of three hostile groups and partition would lead to bad results also.

Answer 5

Yes Bush did tell the truth. For God's sake, we seen the WMD on TV a long time ago and they just keep finding more and yes they would at some time sooner or later be used against us. That is why we went in and took them away before they had a chance.

Answer 6

Your question is hysterical - I find this humurous...

Bush told the following to a German newspaper yesterday:

Bush told weekly Bild am Sonntag when asked about his high point since becoming president in January 2001.

"I would say the best moment of all was when I caught a 7.5 pound perch in my lake."

The only problem is that the world's record for the largest freshwater perch caught is 4 pounds 3 ounces.

So Bush either doubled the world record, and didn't report it, or he's a liar.

Answer 7

actually, if you read the report that just came out, it says that they found "approximately 500 weapons from the pre gulf war era (pre 1991) SINCE 2003".

and our own specialists have reported that many of them were empty, and that most of the chemical agents in them were no longer a real threat.

btw, liberals suck, and conservatives blow. it would be nice if there was a SANE party that understood you dont need to conform to all of the beliefs on either side, you can form your own thoughts about things.

and, you can pick your lie. we were either lied to when we were sent into baghdad when rumsfield said "we know where the WMD's are, they're north south east and west of baghdad", or we were lied to 3 months ago when he said "i never said we knew where they were". by default, ONE of these MUST be a lie. he cant believe both. both of these are on tape. which lie is more convenient for you?

Answer 8

I'm numb to it all now. I just want to find a way to stop terrorists. I want to suggest something.
Let's all have a restarting point. Right NOW everyone is the same. Let's base future events on how we treat people at this starting point.
If we help people, let them say thanks; if we offend someone, say sorry; if we accidently kill someone, pay compensation; if we kill someone on purpose, get killed or spend the rest of your life in prison; if we get caught planning to kill, the same penalty as killing must be paid. You'll probably find that the same terroists will still kill because people still don't believe the same as them. We will still have to hunt them down and still go into countries that are hiding them... like Iraq did. The liberals will still complain and say that (whoever the republican president is) is a criminal.

Answer 9

You mean the WMD's mentioned in the 2002 NIE?

OH wait-we haven't found those yet. Where's the yellowcake? Nada.

I find it humorous that people ignore that fact.

Answer 10

If they actually found something substantial, then why isn't the bum (I mean, Bush oops) smirking and butchering the English language while announcing that he was right. Maybe he's getting his next costume ready or a banner together...who knows but he sure isn't holding any press conferences. Stop watching Fox News and watch the real news!!