But liberals say he had no WMD's so therefore you can't have it both ways right?
2006-12-30 09:13:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
Bush said he no longer had WMD. The reason he had none was he had destroyed them all after the first Gulf War. This has been documented by US military searches and personal testimony from top level defectors.
The stocks that he had possession of prior to 1991 were almost exclusively from the US or produced with the equipment and technical advice of the US.
Being a Liberal is used as if it has an evil or immoral basis.
Maybe a review of the definition is required
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/Liberal
Then there are the Conservatives
http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/conservative
Now you know what you are calling people. Personally, I am very proud to be a Liberal.
A few examples of conservative governments:
Saddam Hussein
Saudi Arabia
Taliban
Iran
Pinochet's dictatorship
Hitler's Germany
Syria
Castro's Cuba
A description of Conservative religions:
http://www.people.vcu.edu/~dbromley/conservativereligions.htm
The list goes on. Not one of these are a government that I would choose to be a member of.
Unfortunately for the conservatives in the audience, facts are not changed by ones point of view.
And just because you refuse to accept the facts, either by dismissing them without research, or by ignoring them, (http://www.newsmax.com/archives/ic/2006/11/20/94237.shtml) , the facts remain facts.
We supplied Iraq with WMD Materials and expertise to help Hussein in his war with Iran. Fact
Saddam reported to weapon's Inspectors that all such weapons and the facilities to produce such weapons had been destroyed. Fact
The weapons had, in fact been destroyed, and the programs to produce such weapons had dismantled. Fact
The White House wanted a reason to go into Iraq before 9/11. Fact
The administration cherry picked intelligence reports, concentrating only on the reports that reflected their policy desires. Fact
The administration ignored all evidence and intelligence that supported the true state of the Iraqi Weapons programs. Fact
When will the "conservatives" wake up and realize that just because one believes that something is so, does not make it so?
When will the pro-life conservatives realize that it is much worse to kill a human once they are conscious of their existence and can feel pain, than it is to abort a group of cells growing inside a woman's body?
When will they realize that this war has killed more than 500,000 innocent Iraqi men, women, and children?
When will they realize that the deaths of 3000 Americans, while tragic, does not justify the deaths of nearly 1,000,000 foreign citizens.
I would love to be a fly on the wall when they are trying to justify their positions to their God on their Judgment Day.
Unfortunately as the definition alludes to, Conservatives are not open minded, not inclined to believe any information that does not support or reinforce their belief system.
I am just glad that they are the minority in this Country, and I pray that we can keep enough of the liberals energized to keep voting them out of office.
For those conservatives that love to hate homosexuals, I would recommend reading this letter and doing some serious thought on the matter. You can't have it both ways - you are conservative.
http://www.coffinman.co.uk/dear_dr_laura.htm
2006-12-30 18:17:15
·
answer #2
·
answered by Jack C 3
·
0⤊
1⤋
Looking at history as you've presented it, is basically a quote out of context. Either you have been duped into believing this presentation is correct, or you have an agenda and a very perverse paradigm. Try looking at the much bigger picture. Keep it simple and begin with the U.S. overthrow of the Iranian government back in the days of Eisenhower. The boys in the CIA did it just to see if it could be done. They were surprised at how easily and how quickly it happened. The Shaw ascended the Peacock Throan and quickly became someone other than who "We" thought he was. He was himself a ruthless dictator and we still supported him financially, militarily and technologically. And when he was overthrown, we (then democrat President Jimmy Carter)took him in. The Iranians learned to hate us. The Iranians were at war with Iraq. It was the lesser of two evils. And when it became clear that Saddam was no better than the Shaw, we stopped supporting him. Russia began to support him instead.
Today's conflict has grown out of that and transformed itself into a world class problem stemming from oil and the world economy. Iran and Syria are both key subterfugal players and both support terrorism. In this picture and light, Bush is little more than another stepping stone in the river of history. Your hatred of him blinds you from seeing the big picture and understanding what is REALLY at stake. Your verbage is in and of itself nothing short of sedition and could even be considered treasonous when you consider that the terrorists of the world feed off the words you speak/write. You don't have to agree or even support him, but you should not give aid to terrorists and THAT is exactly what you are doing.
2006-12-30 17:32:39
·
answer #3
·
answered by Doc 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
What kind of car do you drive pal? If you run into a parked car because you are angry one day and kill some innocent person, should the manufacturer of your car be held liable? The dealership that sold you, the terrible driver with anger issues? Should they be held liable? Whatever munitions and military hardware that whack job had, was sold to him to aid him in the Iran-Iraq war. NOT to mass murder his own citizens.
2006-12-30 17:19:07
·
answer #4
·
answered by Rich B 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
The US funds lots of countries with weapons, when it benefits us. Then we end up fighting them later.
2006-12-30 17:26:50
·
answer #5
·
answered by djcapron 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Brown Saddam was a member of a Powerful Anglo Criminal Mafia led by Bush senior. They kill their own.
2006-12-30 17:20:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by Reba K 6
·
0⤊
2⤋
Where else would he get his weapons of mass destruction from and the West know about them?
2006-12-30 17:13:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by dot&carryone. 7
·
1⤊
1⤋
Well now another Bloke heard from. I have two words for your uneducated self, Hitler, and Chamberlain.
2006-12-30 17:12:54
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
of course we sold him such things but he used them. it is no surprise that they hung him so qquickly. he may have started naming names...
2006-12-30 17:15:58
·
answer #9
·
answered by Boring 5
·
1⤊
1⤋