Susan Rice new Secretary of State?

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

R. Clark said from day 1 Pres. Bush was saying - it's Iraq, we have to go after Iraq. They all voted on the evidence that was shown to them by the admin. If they were feed the wrong info, how can you hold them responsible?

I guess he wanted to finish what his father didn't do - get Hussain out of Iraq.

" If they were feed the wrong info, how can you hold them responsible?"

If Bush intenionally misled them, no one would condone that. Least of all me. But those people who say Bush made stuff up to finish what his father started, are about as rational as those who say Obama is a Muslim. Kooks on both sides. Obviously you have thrown your hat in with one of those groups, because to you, it's OK to falsely accuse the President of treason, presumably as long as the President is white and conservative. I don't know what other motive you have for making up jibberish about Bush. We don't need to make up stuff about Obama, there's more than enough real krazy stuff to point bring up.

Paul, you are now a psychatriast, you can read Bush's mind, and you know that he "wanted" to go to war.

I have never heard Senators Clinton, Biden, Kerry, Edwards, claim that they were duped. I guess you have more insode scoop than they do. If they're not saying it, I can't imagine why you are claiming it.

Bill Clinton and Hilary Clinton both said that they were sure Iraq had WMDs. They get a pass. That's not hypocrisy, Paul?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT;971185
I have never heard Senators Clinton, Biden, Kerry, Edwards, claim that they were duped. I guess you have more insode scoop than they do. If they're not saying it, I can't imagine why you are claiming it.
[COLOR="Red"

Washington, D.C. (CNSNews.com) – U.S. Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts on Tuesday told an audience at the liberal Take Back America conference that he was sorry for voting to authorize the war in Iraq, calling the entire mission "a mistake."

"We were misled, we were given evidence that was not true," Kerry said. "It was wrong, and I was wrong to vote [for it]."
[/COLOR]

You asked why Pres. Bush wanted to go to war. I told you a possible reason. Clark stated that right from the beginning he was saying that it was Iraq who was responsible for 9/11 - that is not reading his mind.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

You asked why Pres. Bush wanted to go to war. I told you a possible reason. Clark stated that right from the beginning he was saying that it was Iraq who was responsible for 9/11 - that is not reading his mind.

Paul, John Kerry says he was misled, and that's it? He says it, so it's true?

I can find kooks who say Obama is a Muslim. Does that make it true?

I can find kooks who say 09/11 was an inside job. Does that make it true?

PaulS, if Bush willfully misled the Senate into voting for the war, I have one simple question for you. Why wasn't Bush impeached when the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006?

Here's another...if Bush "wanted" to go to war, why did he give Saddam Hussein so many chances to avoid war? If Hussein had agreed to the terms of the UN resolution, the war would not have happened. The Bush administration gave Hussein several chances to comply. If Bush "wanted" to go to war, why give Hussein so many chances to avoid war?

Funny. One minute Bush is a dumb hick, right off the set of 'Hee Haw'. The next minute, he's a real-life Jack Bauer who manufactures evidence to fool almost the entire Senate, and he does it in such a way, that they cannot touch him for it. That's one sharp cookie.

Even Spence said, in this thread, that there is no evidence that Bush intentionally misled anyone. That's a pretty good indicator.

Paul, the Senate was not misled. They looked at the evidence, and made the wrong conclusion. That their conclusion was wrong, does not mean it was unethical. If Hussein repeatedly kicks out weapons inspectors, it's not lunacy to conclude that he's hiding something. It's that simple.

Did George Bush mislead Bill Clinton, who said several times that he believed Hussein had WMDs?

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Paul, John Kerry says he was misled, and that's it? He says it, so it's true? You said that Kerry never said he was mislead so I showed you that he did say it. Now your just dismissing it.

PaulS, if Bush willfully misled the Senate into voting for the war, I have one simple question for you. Why wasn't Bush impeached when the Democrats took control of Congress in 2006?While there was a popular support for impeaching him I believe that the reason the Dems. didn't was that they saw how the backlash against the Clinton impeachment hurt the Rep. I also think Bush's approval ratings were so low at the time that they saw no "upside" in impeaching. His ratings weren't going to go any lower, so they prob. figured there was no upside for them. This was during a time when we were still at war so it was a real hot button issue.

dfsafa

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

dfsafa

Paul, so now you are qualified to speculate on why they didn't impeach Bush.

They didn't impeach Bush, because he (unlike Bill Clinton) didn't commit an impeachable offense.

Yes, there were a lot of folks who wanted him impeached. Mouth-breathing, unquestioning, morinic simpletons, who believe everythiyng they hear when it comes from those who despise Bush.

Bush was wrong (as were a whole lot of Democrats in the senate, and Bill and Hilary Clinton, as well as the democrats' new hero, Colin Powell). Being wrong, is not the same as lying. If it were, you would be a textbook compulsive liar. Because yu are wrong almost every time.

Paul, let's see the evidence that Bush knowingly manufactured false evidence, without which the Senate would not have voted for war. You made that accusation, so please either back it up, or admit that it's about as valid a theory as saying Obama is a Muslim (which would be less disturbing that Obama's true religion, Black Liberation Theology)

Here's what happened. Many of the Dems in the Senate voted for the war because, like Bush, they believed there were probably WMDs. When there weren't, and when the war became very unpopular, those same Dems had to distance themselves from the now-unpopular war. The easiest way to do it? Blame Bush. That's how it all started, that was Ground Zero for Bush Derangement Syndrome.

Paul, what do you think of US senators who lied about why they voted for the war, simply because public sentiment changed? Those flip-floppers are the ones who lied. Because they know they weren't 'duped'. But unlike Bush, most of them don't have the integrity to say "I made a mistake".

If there was any evidence that Bush lied, that 2006 Congress would have impeached him in a nanosecond. They hated Bush, because Bush beat them like a dog. That 2006 congress ( a huge victory for the dems) was elected with one mandate - get us the hell out of Iraq. And not only did Bush prevent them from getting out of Iraq, he forced them to go along with the Surge, which they said was doomed to fail, yet it worked like a charm. They had colossal egg on their faces, they got completely destroyed by the dumb hick Bush. They hated him for it, and they still hate him for it.

There's no way they would have decided not to impeach him, if they had a chance of doing so.

[scottw]

oh brother...Spence, quick, say something about Susan Rice.....

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by scottw

oh brother...Spence, quick, say something about Susan Rice.....

I'll say somehting about her...she's precisely what I would expect from Obama, an incompetent liar who is invulnerable to criticism. She is invulnerable to criticism, because anyone who dares to criticize her is either a sexist or as racist. This is, of course, happening already. And when you flat-out accuse a titanic hero like John McCain of being a racist, you are revealing how pathetic you truly are.

And I love Obama's Rambo impression at the press conference (you wanna come after her, then you better come after ME!"). very dignified and presidential.

I hope she gets confirmed, i hope the GOP just lets him do everytihng he wants to do, so that the collapse will be that much more spectacular and undeniable in root cause.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Paul, so now you are qualified to speculate on why they didn't impeach Bush.

You're a joke. You ask why he wasn't impeached and then when I give you why I thought he wasn't, you insult me. Just as before when you state Kerry never said he was mislead. I copy a quote where he said he was and then you say it wasn't true. You ask me why Pres. Bush wanted to go to war and I told you why I thought and what R. Clark said and again you insult me.

If you don't like the answer, don't ask the question.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

You're a joke. You ask why he wasn't impeached and then when I give you why I thought he wasn't, you insult me. Just as before when you state Kerry never said he was mislead. I copy a quote where he said he was and then you say it wasn't true. You ask me why Pres. Bush wanted to go to war and I told you why I thought and what R. Clark said and again you insult me.

If you don't like the answer, don't ask the question.

Paul, I asked why he wasn't impeached. You didn't know the answer, so you invented a hypothetical that supported your previous (also false) conclusion that Bush clearly committed an impeachable offense.

You did indeed show a quote where Kerry said he was duped, and I credit you for that. Although, with no evidence, that seems about as valid a claim as Trump claiming that Obama wasn't born in Hawaii.

"If you don't like the answer, don't ask the question"

You're making up answers out of thin air, answers which, shockingly, support your conclusions.

Where is the evidence that Bush intenionally fabricated evidence, without which the Senate would have voted against the war? All of your theories are based on that assumption, that the senate was 'misled'. OK, let's see it.

And situations where Bush's conclusions were wrong, are not the same as intentional deception. I'm sure you agree there's a difference between an honest mistake and a lie.

The notion that Bush lied in order to give him a pretext to invade, just because he wanted to finish what Daddy started, is absurd. When you consider the irrefutable fact that Bush gave Saddam dozens of chances to avoid war by complying with the UN treaties, your entire premise falls apart. If you 'want' war with someone, you don't give them dozens of opportunities to avoid war.

If you want to say (with the benefit of hindsight) that Bush jumped the gun, you can make a compelling case for that. To say that Bush intentionally deceived the US Senate, the UN, and all the other nations that provided troops, is anothe rmatter.

Try not to get another thread shut down if you can, please.