General discussion


"I wasn't happy when we found out there wasn't weapons,"

By Oz_Media ·
Well I was reviewing some comments and objections when I reread the following sentence and realized just how f***ed up it sounds.

If I was suspicious of WMD and found out there were none, I would be PRETTY DAMN HAPPY!!

For SOME reason Bush says he wasn't hapy to find out there were NO WMD.

This says MANY things;

-I sold the premise of war based on WMD (admittedly NOT to liberate people as SOME still think)

-I REALLY wanted some WMD to be found because everyone says I lied and well.......I did.

-I really was hoping thre was a geat threat to America and I would be found correct, I am 'happy to say' we ARE under threat of attack and I can now finally prove it.

-After everyone calling my bluff there are finally no cards left in the table

Anyway you look at it, CowBush F****D UP BIG TIME! And he even said as much when sayign "I wasn't happy when we found out there wasn't weapons,"

Well done, too bad we don't all have a backwards cowboy running our countries.

As a president, would you not be HAPPY to say, "Well I must admit I am happy to say I was mislead and completely wrong about the threat on our great nation!"

The problem with what SHOULD hqve been a great realization, he had already attacked them on that false premise because he didn't believe it when weapons inspectors didn't find anything.

Maybe he can believe them now, well he probably wouldn't he'll just make up some other slithering excuse.

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

not what I've heard at all

by Oz_Media In reply to Come on Oz

My take based on what I heard saw read etc.

Kerry was all for the use of force as a last resort to enforce inspections. That failed, as a last resort he had sided with the invasion.

GWB ceased successful inspections in order to invade, thus it NOT being a last resort. CLOSE, but not quite.

As for the comments, yes it is taken out of context and centered upon. NO DIFFERENTLY than Bush taking Kerry's comments about Wrong war, wrong place out of context and repeating it OVER AND OVER AGAIN, for TWO debate sessions. It was most obvious what Kerry meant and the fact that GWB TRIED to make an issue out of it, just hurt his own integrity if anything. It was OBVIOUS thta he was tryig to make something out of nothing and this looks really bad on a supposed leader.

From what I haev seen, heard, read, there is no evidence that Saddam has even had these capabilities for some time, no evidence that he continued to even persue WMD. Labs were out dated and unused for several years, as he had said they were. He actually HADN'T built ANY facilities that would allow persuit of greater technologies such as nukes or intercontinental missile launches. He said he had stopped development and apparently he had. No SOME people are SO sure he HAS been devloping WMD that they figure they MUST have been moved, but even the arial photos of the trucks bound for Syria etc. were said to be inconclusive and most likely NOT WMD being transported out of Iraq.

Some people say I am Anti-American, this is because I disagree with what I see as Bush's empty plans. I suppose that a difference of opinion is not actually allowed in a democracy after all.

But hey, if we all had to agree on ONE view, there would be no democracy would there?

The whole reason that America is considered a democracy is because there are TWO sides and TWO views and each is SUPOSED TO BE just as relevant and as acceptable as the other. If it was Republicans ONLY, that would be considered a dictatorship would it not? I think that's what a few of the staunch Republicans here fail to realize when they discount everything opposed to republicans, they say how they want to push democracy around the world but they expect a dictatorship when doing it (there is only one right way attitude) , a LITTLE hypocritical don't you think?

Collapse -

Two views?

by Paymeister In reply to not what I've heard at al ...

Sure sounds to me like Socialist Party #1 and Socialist Party #2...

Collapse -

That's right

by Oz_Media In reply to Two views?

I forgot, everyone else is a socialist right?

My mistake, sorry, it's just that I've been labelled as so many different political affiliations here that it really gets comical to see people trying to tag me. Especially when I don't support any of them!

Collapse -

OR it shows that he is concerned where Saddam might have shipped them offto

by Garion11 In reply to "I wasn't happy when we f ...

Before you go on your Anti-Bush rantings (oops, too late but I will continue anyway) look at it this way..

Is it possible he is concerned because the WMDs might have disappearred to another country? a terrorist group? Yes that would be a concern indeed. If the whole world's intelligence agreed he either had them or tried to pursue them (or had them in smaller quantity) then wouldn't you be concerned if you don't find them instead of going on your "lies" theory? Just maybe, maybe it wasn't a lie *GASP*. In your own words, "Wake up".

This is why you are considered an Anti-American. YOu don't have to follow us blindly, but what you do on purpose is to assume, you ASSUME that whatever an American president tells you is a lie without even considering that he might be telling the truth.

Collapse -

not even close

by Oz_Media In reply to OR it shows that he is co ...

Doesn't even warrant a response as usual.

Read the last paragraph of the last post I made.

Collapse -

Pot calling the kettle black?

by husp1 In reply to OR it shows that he is co ...

As you two bicker back and forth perhaps the one thing that was overlooked is the Mobil wepons labs that We sold sadam? perhaps beleaving isn't all it's cracked up to be. He may not HAVE the WMDS but he had the means to make them and on the other hand where did the Moble labs go?

Collapse -

Yeah he's happy alright.....

by husp1 In reply to "I wasn't happy when we f ...

I bet hes happy about the job market and economy figures as well!!! what a DUMBA**

Collapse -

What do you expect

by James Schroer In reply to Yeah he's happy alright.. ...

When you have someone like Clinton blowing up the economy like it was a bubble. It had to pop some time because he didn't build it from the ground up. Anything that grows fast is weak. It takes time to grow a stonge economy so that it will stay strong and not burst. If you look at the true numbers Bush was able to bring this economy back for a resesion after Clinton messed it up. Yes there maybe 5xx,xxx more people with out a job at this time but the number is shrinking everyday with Bush in office.

Collapse -


by husp1 In reply to What do you expect

maybe you should check those figures, the 560,000 jobs that you are refering to are "White collar" but you let the 1.6 Million private sector just drift on by. When I have to compeate with 600 people for a job at Mcdonalds I KNOW something wrong and to claim that its getting better is just Illogical.

Collapse -

Try checking the other way...

by James Schroer In reply to Pardon?

If you figure the 1.6 million of private sector lost jobs to those that were gained in the public sector you get the 5xx,xxx lost jobs. According to cnn: Claim: Kerry said 1.6 million jobs were lost under Bush.

CNN Fact Check: Kerry was actually referring to the number of private sector jobs lost on Bush's watch. When the increase in public sector jobs is factored in, the overall job loss since January 2001 is 821,000, according to numbers released last week by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. The bureau also announced that the number of net jobs lost will likely fall to about 585,000 when the agency issues a correction next February.

Related Discussions

Related Forums