Can You Hear Me Now?


  • Moa

    It’s funny, the lefties still use the “missing WMD” against Bush and then say he lied. Well, genius lefties, Bush would have lied if he didn’t expect to find WMDs and therefore had them fabricated – but he didn’t find any, showed moral courage by resisting the temptation to fake WMDs despite enormous pressure, and said they didn’t find any (of course, they went to Syria). This shows how moral and truthful Bush was.

    Plus, Bush showed great conviction and cajones of steel and won Iraq (along with the US military, and Allies!) despite fanatic opposition everyone saying it couldn’t be done.

    The liar is not Bush, it is Obama and Hiliary and the entire White House team. They lie their faces off about Benghazi and the IRS and the NSA the economic “recovery” and wanting to get bin Laden (which Obama and Valerie Jarrett refused to do *three times*, and they had to be tricked by starting the raid without asking for approval). Then we have Obama taking the war that Bush won and pulling out for personal political gain – essentially handing over Iraq to the Iranians.

    There is simply no comparison between GW Bush and Obama. One is a man and a leader making hard decisions. The other one is merely an adolescent with a teleprompter – who lacks courage to be unpopular to do what would benefit *all* Americans (not just his favored people).

    Hilliary is no better, and could well be even worse.

    Tea Party Constitutionalism and Ted Cruz for President 2016 is the solution.

    • semus

      Hillary is worse because she’s smarter than Barry. She isn’t a genius but she is devious and has absolutely no scruples.

      • aileen22

        My Uncle Alex recently got an awesome Mercedes SL-Class SL65 just by some parttime working online with a laptop. Learn More Here


      • Leland64

        She’s not that smart – she flunked the D.C. Bar Exam.

        • iluvisrael

          Most of her achievements came by riding on the coattails of her sleazy, cheating husband.

          • Kerri Feldman

            Which makes her a bitter, hateful hag. I pray she is not elected in 2016.

      • 1proactive2

        She’s as sociopathic as her hubby, so your assessment is spot-on accurate. As a forensic psychologist reading and listening to her over the years I would estimate her IQ as around 100 to 105. That is average for a white.

    • 1Indioviejo1

      Cojones, MOA, Cojones!

    • EarlyBird

      You can’t make this s**t up! This is self parody of the highest order:

      “…Bush would have lied if he didn’t expect to find WMDs and therefore had them fabricated – but he didn’t find any, showed moral courage by resisting the temptation to fake WMDs despite enormous pressure…”

      Bush got us into the worst foreign policy disaster since Vietnam, at a cost of $1 trillion dollars and counting, 4,000+ dead Americans, tens of thousands maimed, hundreds of thousands of dead Iraqis, created a new playground for Al Queda, strengthened Iran and damaged American credibily for generations. But at least he didn’t FABRICATE WMDS that never were in Iraq after all that, considering that his venal neocon handlers pressured him to! He should get a good scout merit badge!


      “…and said they didn’t find any (of course, they went to Syria).”

      Who says they went to Syria? How do you know? Nobody knows this. But even if they did, its just ANOTHER major blunder of this self inflicted wound.

      “Plus, Bush showed great conviction and cajones of steel and won Iraq…”

      “Won Iraq”?! Won WHAT? Name a single foreign policy achievement that came out of that debacle. ONE.

      There is NO SANE PERSON who can POSSIBLY believe this nonsense. It requires the most deranged partisan to spout this idiocy. There is no greater indictment of the “Tea Party” and “Ted Cruz for President 2016″ crowd this this jaw-droppingly unhinged post. It’s as if this idiot lives in an alternate universe.

      • Smoking Hamster

        Iran temporarily halted their nuclear program and Qaddafi completely abandoned his.

        • EarlyBird

          I’m not sure how your post relates to mine, but thanks for the information.

          • Moa

            Smoking Hamster was kindly pointing out to you direct consequences of the Iraq War.

            By Bush and the neo-cons showing determination to confront tyrants not only did they:

            1) remove the murderous tyrant Saddam (thereby *saving* hundreds of thousands of Iraqi lives in the long term),

            2) they also scared Iran into pausing its *nuclear weapon* program, and

            3) Qaddafi gave up his *nuclear and WMD programs* and fought Al Qaeda (which is why the pro-Muslim Brotherhood White House had to remove him).

            > “I’m not sure how your post relates to mine”

            Sounds like you have a lot of homework to do. You are very far “behind the eight ball”. You simply repeat the memes of the hypocritical anti-war Left without knowing anything of substance, it appears.

          • EarlyBird

            Actually, Moa, I agree with you. I don’t think it was worth the dreadful cost to America, but those are some achievements, for sure.

      • glpage

        “Who says they went to Syria?” Georges Sada for one. Given he was a general on Saddam’s air force I would give him more credence than just about any of the bozos on the left. This mentions Sada and others and tends to support the chemicals were moved to Syria…

        • EarlyBird

          Chalk up another failure for that debacle.

      • Drakken

        It is amazing how far your up Obummers azz, as a matter of fact if he was in front of you, you would get down on your knees and blow him, then you would turn around and without the common courtesy of a reach around, you would let him have at you, and you would still love him for it.
        So Sparky you keep voting for those I feel therefore I am lefts and see where that gets you.

      • Moa

        EarlyBird, the US won Iraq but that victory was given away for personal political gain by Obama.

        > “Who says they went to Syria? How do you know? Nobody knows this. ”

        There was talk of convoys heading to Syria before the outbreak of hostilities. No one could see inside those convoys – yet, here we have chemical weapons in Syria. In fact, if you’ve been paying attention with the debacle of the last few weeks the chemical weapons appear to have been shifting back to Iraq. The pan-Arab goal of sticking it to the Great Satan trumps nationalism.

        > “Won Iraq”?! Won WHAT? Name a single foreign policy achievement that came out of that debacle. ONE.

        Of course there was no goal – the US was determined to lose from the beginning (remember the press coverage?) – so that is exactly what happened. You pulled out too early. Germany was *worse* than Iraq but the US built it up – most people don’t know about the sporadic fighting in Germany after the official capitulation. Similarly Japan and South Korea required occupation to begin the transformation. With South Korea it took *three decades* until it stopped being crazy and went to the vibrant society it it now.

        > “There is NO SANE PERSON who can POSSIBLY believe this nonsense. It requires the most deranged partisan to spout this idiocy. ”

        Blah, blah. Always discredit the speaker rather than point out specific counter-evidence. C’mon, surely you have a better argument that the “everyone knows” tripe. “Everyone knew” that Galileo was wrong, right? Everyone knew that Global Warming was real, right? (turns out there is a slight long term cooling if you get unbiased observations). Everyone knew that Iraq would be a Vietnam quagmire, right? Everyone knows the US lost Vietnam on the battlefield, right? (wrong! just like Iraq Vietnam was *won* on the battlefield, and the *political* decision was made to cut and run – with disasterous results for South Vietnam half a decade later; why? because Lefties cleverly convinced people it could not be won, and it became a self-fulfilling prophesy, just like Iraq).

        > “Bush got us into the worst foreign policy disaster since Vietnam”

        False. This Syria debacle is far, far, far, worse. The US has *zero* credibility in the eyes of allies *and* enemies. The fecklessness of US political leadership will not be forgotten.

        The White House openly and blatantly supporting the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt against a *secular popular movement* is also another disaster. Just as supporting the Iranian theocrats by ignoring the secular popular movement in Iran in 2009 was a disaster.

        Then we have the foreign policy disaster of Benghazi, when it became clear the US Secretary of State would not rescue *her own Ambassador*. You’d have to be a muppet not to realise that if Hilliary won’t save one of her own high ranking people, she’s not going to lift a finger for Joe The Plumber, and certainly not for one of the US’ loyal allies (like my country).

        Iraq was unpopular, but even if people like you don’t understand, there are people in the rest of the World who see the long-term geopolitical sense of fighting jihadis offshore. The problem with Iraq is not that the US lost on the battlefield, it was that the Leftist anti-war movement forced a pull-out too early. This was directly attributable to a failure of leadership by Obama and his team (I can explain, but won’t here).

        It seems like your thinking is still stuck somewhere from a decade ago. Plus, it appears you want to believe that the US lost on the battlefield in Iraq, despite all the evidence to the contrary. Stop following memes and start investigating facts.

        • Drakken

          That little missive above is probably the best written piece there is on Iraq and the coming debacle the left is trying to get us into. Well done Sir! And Bravo!

          • Moa

            Thank you very much.

        • EarlyBird

          I’ll let you hang yourself with your own tortured logic, lies, denial and inchoate partisan rage:
          “…the US won Iraq but that victory was given away for personal political gain by Obama.”

          “Of course there was no goal – the US was determined to lose from the beginning (remember the press coverage?) – so that is exactly what happened.”

          You should be ashamed of yourself for everything in your post. You are so divorced from truth and reality that it’s jaw dropping. This truly is a place for nuts to hang out and reinforce their own fantasies.

      • TienBing

        In the aftermath of 9/11, attacking Iraq with the intention to visit great pain and destruction on a murderous tyrant who supported terrorism, and was according to ALL major intelligence services (to include the British, German, French, Italian, Israeli, Russian, etc.) in possession of nukes and nuke technology along with weaponized bacterial and chemical stockpiles, was a great idea. Sticking around to nation build was a stupid idea. By spring 2004 Iraq was a debacle waiting to happen.
        But that does not mean there were no WMDs in Iraq. The whole world knew Saddam had massive stockpiles of lethal chemical weapons. Saddam proved it – he used them on Iranians and on his own people. But when we got into Iraq they were all gone. Where did they go? There were reports, again by all of the above intelligence services, as well as Iraqi defectors, of convoys full of munitions leaving Iraq for Syria.
        No sane person would doubt the evidence coming from so many different sources. Only a deranged partisan hack would spout such jaw-dropping unhinged denial.

        • SFC Cav

          They weren’t “all gone” as some would claim, though luckily the insurgents didn’t know what they had or couldn’t figure out how to make them work right as IED’s. Our forces recovered enough Sarin to require at least one explosive destruction that used 26 CASES of C-4………..and that’s just the ONE that I know of personally.

          On top of that, even the beloved Lefty media couldn’t avoid reporting the truth for ONE DAY back when we took possession of both the enriched and un-enriched uranium stockpiles, both of which would be valuable components for dirty bombs. They then complied and put a media blackout on the story, which allowed them to continue their “no WMDs in Iraq” by-line until the day we finished moving the stuff out. Then they reported the completion of that mission for ONE DAY……………and promptly resumed the by-line they KNEW to be a lie.

          One can speculate all one wants about the reasons for the blackout, from deception to threats from the govt, but their blackout did SAVE LIVES of the servicemen who convoyed that crap out, and the lives of Iraqis who live near those routes whose homes and lives would have been devastated by an explosion of a vehicle carrying that crap.

          • TienBing

            Thanks for your service and the info.

      • reader

        I suppose, thousands of Kurds were gassed by space aliens. You seem to be unsatisfied by a reputation of being a blithering idiot. It must be Joe Biden who inspires you to top what looks like the peak of absurd with something even more imbecilic.

      • Veracious_one

        Who says they went to Syria? How do you know? Nobody knows this. But
        even if they did, its just ANOTHER major blunder of this self inflicted

        Iraqi Generals said so///

      • TienBing

        See my post above/below
        At the time your post was being checked – it took them a long time, so I posted a reply in the original post column.

  • gerry

    Hey lefties,the future is behind you,run fast to catch it.The WDMs were sent abroad,in particular,Jordan and Rotterdam,under the nose of the inspectors.You will find it in the UN report of May 2004 by the infamous Demetrius.By the way,you geniuses,this would never have crossed your brain that Saddam might smuggle them of Iraq, not that he bribed the whole UN,so that they would not find anything!Hey geniuses tell us how these weapons got to Rotterdam?

    • EarlyBird

      “Hey geniuses tell us how these weapons got to Rotterdam?”
      Because the worst foreign policy decision of modern times ALLOWED THEM TO GET TO ROTTERDAM you lobotomozed twit! You think this is a DEFENSE of the Iraq War?! You think this is some achievement? You fool!

  • thult

    For crying out loud, BOOKS have been written by IRAQI GENERALS, confirmed by U.S. SATELLITES, that confirm this FACT!

    • EarlyBird

      People are writing as if allowing WMDs to escape from Iraq by virtue of the Iraq War disaster is an achievement. Don’t you morons get it: THAT is why we need to be careful about breaking apart governments. It’s exactly why we don’t want to take out Assad: because his WMD get loose and in the wrong hands.

      • glpage

        Whether Assad remains in power or not is moot. If he stays in power Iran’s influence in the Middle East will grow. If he is deposed the Saudi Arabian Wahabi’s influence will grow. Neither is good for the US. I think the only way Syrian WMDs will remain under reliable control is if the Russians remove them from Syria. I don’t see that happening no matter what agreement is reached by Obama, Putin, and the UN.

        • EarlyBird

          Perhaps the best of all worlds is an Assad that is terribly damaged but holds on for a long time. It keeps Assad, Iran, Hezbollah and Russia focused on fighting off the rebels. I wouldn’t mind if Syria became a quagmire for Moscow or Tehran.

          • Drakken

            Ever notice in this little civil war that the jihadist are not attacking the Russians ? Because the Russians don’t play and aren’t interested in hearts and minds. They are not afraid to use overwhelming fire power as a means to their end unlike we are.

          • EarlyBird

            It’s early, Killer. If Assad starts losing it and they send more Russians there to help him, they are going to have to get out into the streets to actually do something, and BOOM! IEDs, etc. Don’t forget they got their vodka-addled heads handed to them in Afghanistan. You don’t seem to realize this is not a conventional war. Wake up.

          • Merican

            Seems to me both the Russkies and the USDoD (3 tea cuppers) have gotten their azzes whipped by the Pashtuns. I do remember that Putin did a bang up job on the Chechen & Georgian terrorist that were supported/funded by our own little NAZIs, NATO!

          • nomoretraitors

            They also aren’t interested in “world opinion”


        First, your side has been complaining ever since the Howard Dean campaign (without merit) that Bush lied about WMD’s. If they did wind up in Syria, not only did Bush not lie, but the intelligence assessments he relied upon were correct (as indeed we know they largely were, based on the Duelfer report, at least to the extent that Saddam wanted more WMD’s and had programs to get them). Secondly, Saddam was more likely to pass those WMD’s on to terrorists than Assad is – Saddam hated the U.S., committed numerous acts of war against us, and was running (or allowed to be run) a terrorist training camp.

        As for taking out Assad, you’ll notice that it’s your hero, Barry Soetoro, who is leading that effort. He’s joined by some Establishment Republicans, but most of the opposition is Conservative. If you think war with Syria is a mistake, maybe you should switch sides and join us.

        • EarlyBird

          During the Iraq War my “side” was the Republican, pro-war, Bush voting side. I learned my lesson from that horrific administration, and since I put my country first before my political tribe (lifelong registered Republican) I criticize the debacle. So should you if you a patriot, rather than a partisan.

          I don’t know if Bush lied about the existence of WMD; what he DID lie about was that those WMD were a mortal and immediate threat to the US, that if we didn’t invade we’d be met with a “mushroom cloud” (Cheney’s words). They utterly hyped the WMD threat as a false cassus belli.

          The reality is that Bush’s neocon handlers dreamed up some fantasy of a quick and easy war which would transform the Arab Middle East.

          It didn’t work out, did it? It not only didn’t achieve a single foreign policy or security goal for the United States, it reversed our foreign policy and security goals, while costing us profoundly in blood, treasure and prestige.

          Bush was not some bad man. But if Obama or any other Democrat had failed even a quarter as badly as Bush did in Iraq, you’d be calling for his impeachment. This is what partisan zealotry does.

          • celtnik

            He didn’t lie about WMD’s now did he? You can’t understand that?

          • EarlyBird

            Oh please go on and tell us what a wonderful victory Iraq War was, you brain dead goon. Did Bush lie about WMDs? He lied that they were a threat that would result in a “mushroom cloud” if we didn’t invade and occupy immediately. He based his entire invasion on the existence of WMD. Whether they were or were not there, WMD was far, far, far down thelist of reasons for that war. So yes, he lied. And Cheney and Satan still rely on idiots like you to carry water for them.

          • celtnik

            Oh please, sock puppet, you carry water for statist goons and dictator apologists. I like you guys change the argument, there were no WMDs, then when it’s clear he had chemicals and uranium, it changes to, well, now it’s no big deal. Better safe than sorry now, right? Tell me genius, what was that great deal we were getting by subsidizing useless U.N. bureaucrats and weapons inspectors who were taking bribes or otherwise incompetent, or just didn’t care that Saddam still had his weapons program ready to crank up again once the stooges that were bought and paid for let the sanctions expire. You still haven’t answered that one. Not to mention the money spent enforcing the no-fly zone. See, taking out Saddam and destroying his WMD capabilities accomplished the same thing.

          • EarlyBird

            You partisan imbecile. You wouldn’t dare make such claims that Iraq was a victory for America in a real life, public forum, because you would be ashamed of yourself and for people to actually identify you. Your position is beyond ludicrous.
            You’re just another foaming at the mouth far, far right wing nutjob who wonders why he’s out of step with 95% of the nation. That includes conservatives, which you know nothing about. You’re an extemist reactionary. If Bush had bombed your home you’d find a way to applaud, it you piece of filth. You are the kind of jack a$$ who wonders why conservatives and Republicans get a bad name. What a loser.

          • celtnik

            I am not more partisan than you are, you ignorant, lazy Bolshevik. I do consider that a victory, you are just pissed that it was. The reason Republicans got a bad name is because they spent like Democrats, you do remember Medicaire part D and No Child left Behind, right? George Bush wasn’t a conservative, he has more in common with LBJ than Ronald Reagan, but, you being the partisan idiot that you are can’t make that connection. I’m foaming at the mouth? Go back and read your posts and see whose nuts. Scartch that, I guess crazy people like you don’t know you’re crazy. Really, I’m out of step with 95% of the nation, I hardly think so. How did you come up with that number?

          • cynthia curran

            We worshiped the IRCA Reagan do we. Bush spent less money than Reagan did. I’m not a Bush fan but Republicans make Ronnie Raygun a god too much. Research him as governor of California.and the fact he increase the payroll taxes and legalized millions of people.

          • celtnik

            Well, I’ve never lived in California, but as President if you compare their first terms, adjusted for inflation total spending under Bush increased by 14% as opposed to 7%. I blame Republicans in general for that, Bush had a House controlled by Republicans, Reagan got the Democrats to reduce non-military related discretionary outlays by 14% whereas under Bush, it increased by 18%. Bush Signed every spending bill that came across his desk, Reagan vetoed 22.

          • Kerri Feldman

            I am reading all of these back and forth posts of attacks. I am sure this is why our country sucks so bad and why we will never unite as a people to get things done in our country. We don’t get along. If we don’t get along with our fellow Americans, where do we get off going into any country and expecting them to live as we do? LOL. So sad really.

          • TienBing

            Rodney King expressed similar sentiments.

          • Kerri Feldman

            OKAY? So what are you trying to say/

          • TienBing

            Can’t we all just get along?

          • celtnik

            Saddam Hussein is dead, his uranium has been seized and his weapons program completely finished. The U.N.- which is nothing more than an international crime syndicate- who was supposed to have had his weapons confiscated and labs dismanted, isn’t taking anymore kickback money via the “oil for food” scandal. We aren’t wasting money enforcing a “No-flyzone” which didn’t do anygood since the aforementioned U.N. officials being bribed were going to let them expire, and having failed to eliminate his weapons program like they were supposed to, was going to start producing them and continue to fund terrorists. You do remember he gave aid to Ramzi Yousef, the first WTC bomber, and Abu Musan Al Zarqawi, and Al Queda leader before the war started. His terrorist training center at Salman Pak was destroyed too. Stop calling yourself a Republican, you disingenuous twat, we all know you are lying. And what the Hell are you lambasting Ted Cruz for, idiot? He is against military action in Syria. That’s how I know you are a liar, you can’t make that association, yet you blast Ted Cruz just because he is a Republican, because you’re not, and it doesn’t matter.

          • Merican

            As a reformed Conservative & former believer that intervention into Afgan/Iraq were just, I completely agree w/ EarlyBird.

            GWBush & his NeoCon criminal cabal were complete enemies of freedom and their MidEast and Domestic failures were instrumental in electing a flaming Cultural Marxist Obama to finish what the GWB administration started. The Bush family must never be elected to any public office again, they are Criminals and deserve nothing more than a short rope!

      • nomoretraitors

        So where do you stand on “breaking apart” the governments of Egypt and Libya?

        • EarlyBird

          You’ll have to ask the people of Egypt and Libya who broke those governments.

          • nomoretraitors

            In Egypt it was done with the tacit approval of the Obama “administration” in abandoning a stalwart US ally (Mubarak) and then endorsing the anti-Western, anti-Semitic Muslim Brotherhood (we can see how that worked out).
            In Libya, Obama took a more direct role with air strikes to assist the rebels in overthrowing Qadaffi (who did what Saddam Hussein should have done — come clean on WMDs). The result has been the rise of Al Qaeda and the deaths of 4 Americans, including our ambassador, in Benghazi. This is why the Obama State Department ignored requests for more security in the months prior to the attack, why it refused to send aid to the embattled consulate during the attack and why it chose to lie to the public in the aftermath, stating the attack was the result of a YouTube video. To acknowledge the threat would have exposed the fallacy in deposing Qadaffi as well as contradicted the administration narrative that Al Qaeda was on “its heels” since Obama had “gotten” Bin Laden.

      • celtnik

        WTF kind of idiot are you, really? We allowed WMD’s to escape from Iraq, because we invaded it? What? They were smuggled out by the Russians – Iraq and Syria being client states of Russia, whether Soviet or not – before the war, and it’s our fault? Twlelve years, 12 years U.N. weapons inspectors were led around by the nose while Saddam his his weapons program, chemicals and yes 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium which was found after the invasion. Idiot.

        • EarlyBird

          Blah blah blah blah blah….the Iraq War was really like a combination of VE Day and VJ Day. Only uh….the left! doesn’t get it!

          Soak your head, loser.

          • celtnik

            FU, punk. My head works just fine. I guess that post only made sense in the crazy fever-swamp you call a brain because I can’t decipher it.

        • EarlyBird

          “They were smuggled out by the Russians – Iraq and Syria being client states of Russia, whether Soviet or not – before the war, and it’s our fault?”

          BEFORE the war?!! Make up your mind! So you admit Bush lied about WMDs, or so leaned on intelligence that he was effective lying? Gee, you stepped into a pile of honestly by accident. Good for you.

          I’ve said constantly, and have mentioned in this website, that there was a Saddam Problem which needed to be addressed. But pay attention and pay attention good, f**k-o: The answer was NOT to invade and occupy that country. THAT was the problem, get it, fool?! If Obama or any Democrat had done that, you’d have attempted his assassination by now.

          You’re truly that deranged by political tribalism. You stupid, miserable puke. No wonder you get your “news” from this ridiculous propaganda site. But let me guess, the biggest foreign policy mistake in US history is…let me guess…Benghazi! Duuuuh.

          • celtnik

            You are a very confused individual. So, you think the Bengazi coverup is no big deal, just like the fact that Saddam had WMDs? I am not the one who has been inconsistent, I explained that to you, but you are incapable of thinking, so you just start insulting people. How am I lying, how is Bush lying for that matter? He was right, he had them, the inspectors were incompetent and he managed to hide them from them for twelve years, we found 550 metric tons of yellowcake uranium along with chemical and biological agents and the Russians, Chinese, Czechs, Brits and West Germans all said the same thing, so in you mind they are lying too. And yes, the Russians smuggled them out of the country while the same U.N. weapons inspectors sat there and watched it happen. Does that about cover your delusions that he lied about WMDs? Probably not, because, again, you can’t think, you just repeat what you read over at the Daily Kos or some other left-wing fever swamp of a website.

          • EarlyBird

            He was lying that they were a mortal threat to the United States that required us to invade and occupy that nation. Now continue explaining what a glorious victory that war was for us, all the good things it achieved for America.

          • celtnik

            How do you know he was lying, you ignorant troll. I already explained to you all the rats making money off Saddam while they should have been enforcing the sanctions that they voted for. MOst of it, subsidized by U.S. taxpayers. How do you justify any of that, you idiotic troll? I went into detail about all of it, you just didn’t listen, because in your small, cognitively challenged brain, if you ignore it, it doesn’t exist. You have this whole argument backwards anyway, you need to explain to me how the status quo we had going on before the invasion was doing us any good. Can you do that, champ?

          • EarlyBird

            “…you need to explain to me how the status quo we had going on before the invasion was doing us any good. Can you do that, champ?”

            Pay attention. As I stated previously: “…there was a Saddam Problem which needed to be addressed.” But the answer was not to invade and occupy that miserable country, break it apart and plant our soldiers in the middle of a chaotic civil war and insurgency. Of course, this is exactly what Shinseki and other generals explained would happen, and because he wasn’t drunk on neo-con fantasies, he was fired.

            If that war was a win for the US, God forbid if we ever lose a war.

          • celtnik

            But you have no idea how to address it, those evil “new-cons” did. Where is your plan? That’s what I asked you, not that we had a Saddam problem, no sh!t, and there were a lot of people making money on the Saddam problem, at our expense. As for the insurgency, it was being planned before we ever went it, I told you Zarqawi was there before the war, Saddam gave him asylum. All this stuff you are talking about, the civil war, insurgency, that’s over now, it’s 2013, not 2004, buy a calender. You still can’t admit that we won, probably because you wish we had lost. I know you’re historycaly challenged as well, but compare casualties from the Iraq war to say WWII, or even Vietnam.

          • EarlyBird

            I notice that you can’t even follow your own train of thought. You charged me for not knowing there was a Saddam Problem, not with how to fix it.

            How to fix it? Well, certainly not be committing foreign policy suicide.

            “As for the insurgency, it was being planned before we ever went it…”

            But Bush was surprised by it! “Wow! Where did this come from? Wolfowitz, Feith, and Cheney told me it woudl be a cake walk! Gosh!”

            “All this stuff you are talking about, the civil war, insurgency, that’s over now, it’s 2013, not 2004, buy a calender. You still can’t admit that we won…”
            Yeah, it’s like Connecticut on a nice Autumn day over there:


            “Violence in Iraq killed some 1,000 people in July, the highest death toll seen in any month since 2008, the UN said on Thursday. Iraq’s bloody sectarian conflict, in which thousands died in Sunni-Shiite violence, peaked in 2006-2007.”

            Duuuuh! We’re Number One! We’re Number One! If you ever engage in critical self reflection, you’re…a commie! Love it er leave it!
            You sad, silly little man. Go away. I’m done with your dementia.

          • celtnik

            Foreign policy suicide, explain? We still have an ally in the Middle East, Obama has been destroying ours by trying to hand over nations to the Muslim Brotherhood. Who has dementia you silly little man, not me.

            “I notice that you can’t even follow your own train of thought. You charged me for not knowing there was a Saddam Problem, not with how to fix it. ”

            I charged you with both, you came up with the “Saddam was a problem” as an afterthought after you got schooled on the WMD argument. You still haven’t answered the question? It seems you can’t follow a logical train of thought either, or honestly answer anything put to you.

            “But Bush was surprised by it! “Wow! Where did this come from? Wolfowitz, Feith, and Cheney told me it woudl be a cake walk! Gosh!”

            Nobody said it would be a cake walk, you’re a liar. Bush was surprised by the level of violence, but not the fact that Saddam had given aid to Zarqawi and other terrorists. Most of them are dead now too, by the way.

            “Violence in Iraq killed some 1,000 people in July, the highest death toll seen in any month since 2008, the UN said on Thursday. Iraq’s bloody sectarian conflict, in which thousands died in Sunni-Shiite violence, peaked in 2006-2007.”

            Well, that shatters the whole myth that we were creating terrorists with our presence, since we left and there is still terrorist attacks on civilians. I never understood that line of argument from you lefties that we were creating more terrorists, since that would mean you would have to have an exact count in the first place, which you didn’t. I also never understood why you thought they were killing Iraqi civilians, because we were there? Why would they do that? Nobody ever said there wouldn’t be more violence either, they don’t run the country now do they.? Tell me, what is your view on Syria? If you say we need to remove Assad – which is probably you’re opinion, since you are an Obama sock puppet – well then you’re no different than a neo-con warmonger, if you want to aid the rebels, well then you are giving aid to the same kind of people who killed those people in Iraq, which means you support another “foriegn policy disaster”, so Which is it?

            “Duuuuh! We’re Number One! We’re Number One! If you ever engage in critical self reflection, you’re…a commie! Love it er leave it!”

            WTF does that even mean? Is that you trying to be funny, because you’re not, and you would know critical self-reflection from a row boat.

            “You sad, silly little man. Go away. I’m done with your dementia.”

            translation: I’m getting my ass handed to me in this thread so I’ll throw out one last petty insult before I skulk away.

          • celtnik

            Furthermore, that violence that you site is sectarian in nature and no different than sectarian violence anywhere else in the Middle East. See you can’t make the logical connection that it has nothing to do with foreign fighters, or Al Queda, since we killed or captured most of them. We fulfilled that end of our mission, but you still want to accredit this to some sort of failure to the Bush administration when it has nothing to do with it at all. Again, the Saddam problem was solved – he killed way more civilians than these sectarian clashes – and terrorists don’t have access to money, training or chemical, biological or nuclear material.

          • celtnik

            Since you brought up Bengazi earlier – and want to carry water for these scum who want to cover up the fact that Obama is trying to hand Middle Eastern countries to the Muslim Brotherhood – General Carter Ham and Admiral Charles M. Gaouette were relieved for refusing orders to stand down.

      • Aizino Smith


        Letting WMDs escape?

        Ted Kennedy, the eff’n Lion of the senate was threatening filibuster, to defund the military and everything else. If all his histrionics and those of the left had not happened, things might have kicked off earlier. Iraq would not have been prepared.

        Having such a vocal and formidable opposition party make hay over an issue of national security caused a delay in the war, encouraged the enemy and discourage potential allies.

        Kennedy’s tantrum might have been a factor in Turkey not allowing us to open up a northern front. with a northern front the first phase of the war would have been shorter. The shock & awe would have been stronger. the guerilla war might not have started.

        Sadam knew he could not win. He was banking on the fact that if he drew out the war (conventional or guerilla)long enough we would pack up and leave. He knew the lessons of Tet. He learned the same lesson that General Giap learned. Last long enough, inflict enough casualties and the Americans will go home regardless of how much the other side is suffering.

        • EarlyBird

          “Having such a vocal and formidable opposition party make hay over an issue of national security caused a delay in the war…”

          That’s called “democracy.” It just happened to save us from an idiot strike on Syria. Too bad it didn’t work with Iraq.

          We were so traumatized by 9/11 that many people, like myself, felt we needed to do something massive and dramatic in the heart of the Arab world. And for a few years I fought lefties tooth and nail for what I thought was their defeatism. I was wrong; they were right (on the big things).

          “…the guerilla war might not have started.”

          It was guaranteed to start. Our generals told us so. The invasion and decimation of Iraq’s conventional forces was the easy part.

          The hard part is what generals warned Bush about and said it was impossible given that we didn’t have a quarter of the troops, money or national will to sustain a brutal counter-insurgency campaign in that nation – for decades.

          The generals KNEW that Saddam’s forces would melt away, that a sectarian civil war would break out and myriad of Islamist and nationalist irregular forces would be arrayed against us, and that our troops would be overwhelmed. De-Baathification didn’t help either, but that was just one of expected blunders in a very difficult situation. Bush fired a number of those generals and purged his cabinet of anyone who told him it wouldn’t be a cake walk.

          But further: what did we attempt to achieve with that war, and was that goal even realistic or worthwhile? It’s one thing to want to simply take out Saddam’s regime. But what comes after, and to what end?

          Bush isn’t a bad man. He did the war with the best interests of the US in mind. But we must accept what a disaster it was, so that we will not make those same mistakes again.

          • Aizino Smith

            Striking Syria would be a good thing to do.

            1/2 @ ssing it would not be a good thing

            Obama is suggesting to 1/2 @ ss it or less

            His Se xitary of State the manly Kerry said something would be incredible small that you would not notice it.

            Kennedy dragged it out knowing that he could not win, but he could delay. So he did.

            His list of crimes are long

            -Cheating at Harvard or Yale
            -Mary Kopecne
            -Senatorial Sandwiches
            -photo of his white @ ss as he is humping someone outdoors
            -Dumping his wife (Must be genetic)

          • EarlyBird

            Striking Syria in a big way, rather than 1/2 @$$ing it would be a good thing in what way, exactly? Just to show we can, or that we are generally willing and interested in smashing things in the Arab world? People on this site seem to believe that the pointing of fighting wars is merely to win them, rather than winning those wars to achieve specific goals. I’m not clear on what goal we would achieve by beating up Syria.

          • Aizino Smith

            You kill your enemies. Otherwise you are disrespected.
            Being disrespected in the Arab world is life threatening.

            – 1983 Beirut barracks bombing
            – 1983 United States embassy bombing
            – Supporting al Qaeda in Iraq (2003 to 2011)
            – of carrying out the 1985 hijacking of TWA Flight 847 en route from Athens to Rome.

            Hezbollah And Syria are linked

            Did you watch this video?

          • EarlyBird

            Syria is not our enemy. At least the Assad regime isn’t.

          • Aizino Smith

            “At least the Assad regime isn’t”

            I’ll let that assertion stand for all to see. “Enuff” said.

      • Aizino Smith

        Do you read the “Early Bird”?

  • ObamaYoMoma

    Regardless if WMD were sent to Syria, the subsequent occupation of Iraq because so-called radicals, i.e., Islamists, were hijacking the “religion of peace” and also to lift up the Islamic world into modernity by democratizing it was incredibly fantasy-based and destined to fail from the very get go. Indeed, Islam is not even a faith-based religion much less a so-called “religion of peace”. It’s a very totalitarian cult instead that forbids the freedom of conscience under the penalty of death for blasphemy and apostasy. Not to mention that the sole fundamental purpose of Islam is the subjugation into Islamic totalitarianism of all religions and all infidels through violent and non-violent jihad and the eventual imposition of Sharia, which is Islamic totalitarian law, and because Sharia is considered to be divine by all Muslims, it must always supersede all manmade laws, which are viewed as abominations that must be obliterated in Islam. Thus, when the Bush state department acquiesced to infusing the respective constitutions of both Iraq and Afghanistan with Sharia, at the same time they ensured that both respective countries would remain Islamic totalitarian hellholes. There is so much wrong with the so-called “War on Terror” that I could write a book. Indeed, it is the biggest strategic blunder ever in American history and it was the brainchild of GWB.

    • zoomie

      It seems you are describing a clash of civilizations. How does that work itself out ? Sorry for wanting to get to the conclusion as fast as possible.

      • ObamaYoMoma

        Well, I don’t know because both political parties in the US are exceedingly incompetent when it comes to the scourge of Islam at this time. A few suggestions would be to outlaw Islam and ban and reverse mass Muslim immigration with all of its excess baggage ASAP, since it is really stealth and deceptive non-violent jihad for the strategic purpose of demographic conquest. This would also end the domestic threat of jihad in America at the same time, thereby allowing us to trim the massive department of homeland security. Another step would be to rapidly develop our own domestic oil resources and cease ASAP the purchase of oil from the Middle East, or otherwise seize and confiscate the Mid-East oil resources from the jihadists’ altogether. We should eradicate the ruling Mullah regime in Iran and their nuclear weapons program, and then do the same with respect to the enormous Pakistani nuclear weapons arsenal and nuclear weapons program. Finally, we should also abandon and isolate the Islamic world as much as possible.

    • Merican

      The great Muslim liberator the USofA did manage to kill & run the remaining Christians & Jews out of Iraq & Libya, in the near future w/ the help of the USofA, the last Christians & Jews in Syria and Egypt will have left or been interned.
      But the damn NeoCons, Marxist and other western civilization destroyers will continue to think they are running some type of grand collective crusade. Fools, scalawags and base criminals all just want to destroy the world to save it!

  • nomoretraitors

    Asking the left to admit they were wrong is against their DNA

  • CurmudgyOne


  • LDMack

    Heard you then and hear you now, Sir. We know. They were there then, and now they are here and we are still dealing with them.

  • 1proactive2

    And the east and west coast lefties still believe themselves to be the smartest people in the country. These adult-children would be hilarious if they weren’t so dangerous to the rest of us.

    • cynthia curran

      The truth is I use to live in Orange County California, the left loves Dallas and Houston Texas more since the OC has few blacks while the other two have a lot more blacks. Get your facts straight.

      • 1proactive2

        Then you should move back to where you belong. Us neanderthals will find you, and you won’t like what happens next. Then again, being a lefty, you’re in one of the protected groups in the country so you can destroy at your heart’s content.

        I understand some on the the left has moved to Texas after they’ve all but destroyed their former California digs. They also moved to the Northwest to avoid the groids and taco-flippers, and to begin again engineering the perfect leftist societies.

        Pretty soon you’re going to have to move to Iowa. You’re running out of real estate.

  • TienBing

    Reaction against the partisan attacks by the progressive and anti-American Democrat left in order to defend the blunders of the Bush presidency created fractures within the conservative ranks that would not exist if Bush had been the conservative that many hoped for and thus blindly followed. Defending the totality of Bush’s actions makes cognitive dissonance impossible to avoid.

    There is nothing conservative or American about the progressive program of “policing” the world, making the world safe for democracy, bringing democracy to the world’s benighted (but noble) savages, building nations, or uniting the world under one central government. Those are all goals of utopian fantasists promoted by progressive megalomaniacs (the Republican version are called neo-conservatives).

    If Syria is a threat – take out Syria. Don’t diddle with “bow shots” and “unbelievably small” responses. Don’t choose sides in their civil war; it doesn’t matter which subset of savages uses chemical weapons. If the weapons are an imminent threat – eliminate them.

    Obama and his team of progressive ideologues, aided by so called conservatives aka “neocons”, have made such a hash of things that the best course at this time is to let the Russians play peacemaker/WMD disposer and watch carefully. Do not jump in.

    • Dale Wilson

      Better read your history books! The chief architects of the concept of making America the “world’s policeman” were Democrats Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt. . . .

      • TienBing

        Better reread yours or get a more complete set.
        Aside from your non-sequitor in response to my post: Teddy Roosevelt stomping around with his big stick was one of the first progressives to advocate policing the world.

  • EarlyBird

    And we are more than $1 trillion dollars in the hole (and counting), 4,000+ dead American soldiers, tens of thousands maimed soldiers, countless thousands of dead Iraqis, Iraq has become a playground for Al Queda which it never was, Iran’s biggest enemy has been destroyed and its position has become enormously stronger, while American credibility, security and prestige has been profoundly damaged. Oh and along the way we joined the league of nations that torture. Hurray.

    You forgot the COST of this “quick easy war” you dimwit. Because for retrograde John Bircher lunatics like you the only money worth spending is to bomb our way through the world in the name of democracy and the American Way. God forbid we spend it at home. That’s communism!

    • celtnik

      Well, national defense is the only thing government is constitutionally obligated to spend money on, and 1 trillion is a rounding error compared to what the government has wasted on entitlement programs and other useless government agencies and bureaucratic redtape. Now I know you are a moron because 1.) the John Bircher comparison is inaccurate because he was an isolationists and 2.) we already waste trillions of dollars here at home on things like the “War on Poverty”. That has been going on for 40 years and we are losing, because it just creates more poor people. And yes, moron, that is communism. I already explained to you the there was a terrorist training camp at Salman Pak, that Saddam had given sanctuary to Ramzi Yousef, Abu Nidal, Abu Abbas and Al Queda lieutenant Abu Musab Al Zarqawi, before the war started. Explain that smart guy. Most of those Al Queda guys are dead too. See, that’s how it works, you invade their strongholds and kill them there, before they get over here. Do you not understand that, Von Clausewitz?

  • Ragnar

    The convoy took the WMD to Lebanon where it was buried in the Bekaa Valley and guarded by Syrian troops according to the satellite photos.

  • bob e

    yes indeed…i can still hear him say: “islam is a religion of peace”