…when only a measly 81 Democrats voted to give bush the authority that bush lied to them about?
2007-10-18 02:02:00 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
The Democrats were not given enough time to research whether Bush was telling the truth and most of the information given were lies that bolstered the President's case. The Republicans pushed that legislation through without the chance for debate. There were no WMDs and the administration has admitted that there were none. Nor was there any connection between AlQaida and Saddam. This was all about oil. If you control the flow you get the prices that you desire and that is just what has happened, that is why the invasion did not lower the price of oil. The price of this was, in both money and lives, is way too high. We need to get out as soon as possible.
2007-10-18 02:29:30 · answer #1 · answered by diogenese_97 5 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Where can I get some of the free oil you are talking about? Last time I filled my gas tank it cost me about $48. So that is not exactly free my friend.
81 democrats voted to give the president the authority to go after the terrorists after 9/11. Political suicide if they didn't because the whole USA population wanted this. Hillary Clinton was in this camp. How exactly did Bush lie? President Clinton said the exact same things that Bush did when he launched cruise missles at Iraq. Did Bill lie? You bet.
Now these same people want to cut and run away. Why? Democrats historically (since 1965) have been soft on national defense. They were against Reagans military build up, which ended the cold war. Democrats were against Reagan when he told Gorby to tear down the Berlin Wall. The thought we were provoking Russia. It came down and the eastern block is now working with Nato.
Your statements are showing your lack of intelligence on these issues.
2007-10-18 09:25:22 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 2⤋
I am not a supporter of Bush but to say that the Dems were lied to is simply ludicrous. They had a responsibility to investigate the facts before endorsing a war and they failed miserably at that task. This is one of the most important decisions that a member of congress is called upon to make and many of them admit that they did not even read the intelligence reports. Additionally, the CIA was telling anyone that would listen that Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11, that there were serious faults with the intelligence and that the administration wanted war with Iraq for reasons other than those being given. To say that they were misled is disengenuous to say the least. You cannot bury your head in the sand and then complain that you didn't see the seagull that was sh$#*$#g on you!
2007-10-18 09:11:13 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 3⤋
Dick Cheney said the Iraqi oil was going to pay for the war, with this latest round of money for the war we are up to 750 billion dollars. Either Iraq needs to give the government 750 billion dollars of oil, and we can sell it to the oil companies to get our money back, or Cheney, Bush, Rumsfelt, Rice, Powell, Bremer and the rest of the war geniuses need to be sued for the money
2007-10-18 09:17:22 · answer #4 · answered by Michael G 4 · 4⤊ 2⤋
What gets me is how some people are so "dumbed down" to make statements without researching the information first!
Do you think for a minute that President Bush stood before Congress and briefed them on the intelligence about WMD's or otherwise?! Congressional legislators are given briefings by the same personnel that brief the President.
Lastly, why is it so hard for some to understand that the time it took from when WMD's were first discovered to the time it took to deploy troops, that Saddam had plently of time to dispose or hide them?!
The thousands of Iraqies murdered by Saddam and his terroristic thugs when he employed the deadly nerve gases was proof enough for me!
2007-10-18 09:18:41 · answer #5 · answered by KC V ™ 7 · 2⤊ 4⤋
1. If the Iraq war WAS about oil, do you think we might actually take some?
2. The huge majority of Congress voted to authorize the use of force. WHAT PART DO YOU NOT UNDERSTAND?
2007-10-18 09:05:22 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 5⤋
You are a pinhead. Yeah, Bush is stealing Iraq's oil that's why we we have gas at 2.60 a gallon.
2007-10-18 09:05:35 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 4⤋
during the clinton yrs all the dems in the house and senate voted for war with iraq under the same pretenses
2007-10-18 09:07:52 · answer #8 · answered by darkd3stiny 1 · 2⤊ 4⤋