Putins Letter to the US

[spence]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

OK. So now, you are denying that you said the events leading up to the second Gulf War didn't rise to the level of being called an "active issue"

here is an exact quote.

"The regret is because like many they (those dealing with Saddam) were caught up in the post 9/11 world led by few with an agenda. Very different than the coalition in 1991 when, like with Syria, there was an active issue at hand."

You say here that there was no active issue. You also say that the war was launched by a few with an agenda.

Spence, read the Senate vote on authorizing the use of force. Those in favor included the current Vice President, as well as senators Kerry, Clinton, Schumer, Boxer, Edwards, all those neocons. You're saying they all had an agenda?

What was Joe Biden's agenda, Spence? Enlighten me. What was Senator Clinton's agenda, and Senator Kerry?

Iraq's status (from bad to critical) was elevated because those in power at the time had an agenda. I don't think there's any question that the Admin had an Iraq fixation.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Iraq's status (from bad to critical) was elevated because those in power at the time had an agenda. I don't think there's any question that the Admin had an Iraq fixation.

-spence

"I don't think there's any question that the Admin had an Iraq fixation."

If that's true, it wasn't just the administration Spence. You must necessarily concede, then, that most of the Democrats in the Senate also had that same fixation, and many of those democrats are in the current administration. Shouldn't that frighten you? If senators Biden, Kerry and Clinton all agreed to war because of some irrational fixation, do they belong in the positions of VP and Secstate? Good luck! Let's see how you move the goalposts on this one!

also Spence, do you agree that Saddam repeatedly kicked out the weapons inspectors? And that was in violation of the terms that ended the first war? What would you have done with that fact? Nothing? The US-led coalition gave him all kinds of chances to comply with the weapons inspectors, and there would have been no war had he agreed to the treaty that he signed.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"I don't think there's any question that the Admin had an Iraq fixation."

If that's true, it wasn't just the administration Spence. You must necessarily concede, then, that most of the Democrats in the Senate also had that same fixation, and many of those democrats are in the current administration. Shouldn't that frighten you? If senators Biden, Kerry and Clinton all agreed to war because of some irrational fixation, do they belong in the positions of VP and Secstate? Good luck! Let's see how you move the goalposts on this one!

also Spence, do you agree that Saddam repeatedly kicked out the weapons inspectors? And that was in violation of the terms that ended the first war? What would you have done with that fact? Nothing? The US-led coalition gave him all kinds of chances to comply with the weapons inspectors, and there would have been no war had he agreed to the treaty that he signed.

Bush's and the UN's red lines were clear to the world . They didn't go to save face or to back up tough talk. The reason Bush had support was because he had credibility and a incredible talented cabinet .
Not so much this time around .
I'm thinking the negotiations are coming along much like Obamas try at securing the Olympics for the US
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Bush's and the UN's red lines were clear to the world . They didn't go to save face or to back up tough talk. The reason Bush had support was because he had credibility and a incredible talented cabinet.

Hey, after 9/11 I thought the same thing. Thank god we have that team in place...

Makes it even more astounding that they got nearly everything wrong.

-spence

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Hey, after 9/11 I thought the same thing. Thank god we have that team in place...

Makes it even more astounding that they got nearly everything wrong.

-spence

Help me out here Spence. How many attacks after 9/11 on their watch ?
Nearly everything ??? How's Obama doing?? His records a little worse I think.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

Help me out here Spence. How many attacks after 9/11 on their watch ?
Nearly everything ??? How's Obama doing?? His records a little worse I think.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I believe there were 11 attacks under Bush's watch after 9/11 to US consulates, embassies and places where Americans congregate.

Funny, you didn't hear about most or any of these from the evil liberal media or Democrats trying to make air time. Yet, on 9/11 just last week you had republicans still out beating the Benghazi drum. It's shameful...

-spence

[scottw]

Originally Posted by spence

I believe there were 11 attacks under Bush's watch after 9/11 to US consulates, embassies and places where Americans congregate.

Funny, you didn't hear about most or any of these from the evil liberal media or Democrats trying to make air time. Yet, on 9/11 just last week you had republicans still out beating the Benghazi drum. It's shameful...

-spence

we've listed them before, no Americans died, no lies were told by the administration and they were not the result of incompetence from the administration...you get dumber by the post

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

I believe there were 11 attacks under Bush's watch after 9/11 to US consulates, embassies and places where Americans congregate.

Funny, you didn't hear about most or any of these from the evil liberal media or Democrats trying to make air time. Yet, on 9/11 just last week you had republicans still out beating the Benghazi drum. It's shameful...

-spence

I think Scott covered this quite well .
Amazing you found nothing shameful about the way this Administration handled Benghazi .
You're just getting annoying at this point. I keep waiting for you to say you were just kidding around for the last 5 years. A 5 year practical joke would be amusing
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Hey, after 9/11 I thought the same thing. Thank god we have that team in place...

Makes it even more astounding that they got nearly everything wrong.

-spence

Spence, the Bush administration was wrong about WMDs. How come you won't talk about the fact. that many prominent liberals were equally wrong. Bill and Hilary Clinton, Senators Kerry, Edwards, Biden, Boxer, Feinstein, Schumer. Does it concern you that many in the present administration (Biden, Clinton, Kerry) were every bit as wrong? Or are Republicans the only ones who can be labeled as incompetent for being wrong about Iraq?

[Fly Rod]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Spence, the Bush administration was wrong about WMDs.

Irag did have WMD's ...if U call the gassing of about 5,000 Kurds, men, women and children in one village just a coincidence then I do not know what WMD are.....the problem is we gave Irag time to remove them.

[scottw]

http://www.jpost.com/Syria-Crisis/Re...to-Iraq-326141

uh..oh...

they should send in Iranian inspectors, Jimmy Carter and Dennis Rodman immediately to get control of this situation