March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from BilltheKat. Show BilltheKat's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to FortySixAndTwo's comment:

    In response to BilltheKat's comment:

     

    No. From the beginning.

    ...and I can say I never stayed silent or backed down from that opinion. 

     



    What...you want a medal of something?

     



    Medals are like hemorrhoids, sooner or later every azz.hole gets one.

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    No it was not worth it.  It`s pretty easy to say that now.  Last night I watched Hillary`s speech on Oct 22, 2002.  She spoke strongly of Saddam`s WMD and the threat that he was to the area and to his own people.  She spoke of the 100`s of thousands of Iraqis he had killed with WMD, and she was adamant about his removal and support for Resolution 114.

    Hence, part of the reason she lost in 2008...

    ...to an unknown state senator who gave a speech a few weeks earlier in 2002 taking the position against military action.

    Hate if you must, but it turned out he was right.

     

     

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    No it was not worth it.  It`s pretty easy to say that now.  Last night I watched Hillary`s speech on Oct 22, 2002.  She spoke strongly of Saddam`s WMD and the threat that he was to the area and to his own people.  She spoke of the 100`s of thousands of Iraqis he had killed with WMD, and she was adamant about his removal and support for Resolution 114.

     

     

    Hence, part of the reason she lost in 2008...

    ...to an unknown state senator who gave a speech a few weeks earlier in 2002 taking the position against military action.

    Hate if you must, but it turned out he was right.

     

     

     




    Who hates?  He got lucky.  Hillary, Bill, Gore, Lieberman, Kennedy (who gave a very specific speech about WMD), Kerry, Edwards, Dodd, Daschel, .......and 40 nations were all for Iraq.  And let`s not forget the vote:

    House 300-134

    Senate 77-23

    Yes, this incompetent got lucky and got it right.  If you think that`s why Hillary lost to him, you`re out of your mind.

     

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    No it was not worth it.  It`s pretty easy to say that now.  Last night I watched Hillary`s speech on Oct 22, 2002.  She spoke strongly of Saddam`s WMD and the threat that he was to the area and to his own people.  She spoke of the 100`s of thousands of Iraqis he had killed with WMD, and she was adamant about his removal and support for Resolution 114.

     

     

    Hence, part of the reason she lost in 2008...

    ...to an unknown state senator who gave a speech a few weeks earlier in 2002 taking the position against military action.

    Hate if you must, but it turned out he was right.

     

     

     

     




     

    Who hates?  He got lucky.  Hillary, Bill, Gore, Lieberman, Kennedy (who gave a very specific speech about WMD), Kerry, Edwards, Dodd, Daschel, .......and 40 nations were all for Iraq.  And let`s not forget the vote:

    House 300-134

    Senate 77-23

    Yes, this incompetent got lucky and got it right.  If you think that`s why Hillary lost to him, you`re out of your mind.

     



    So, every one of those 157 congress critters AND the current president, who advised against the Iraq War were "lucky"...?  That's pretty weak.  Does that make the rest "unlucky"...just victims of the unfortunate circumstance of being wrong...?

    The panoply who favored invasion are beside the point; they have their own consciences to deal with.  That doesn't make the people who got it right any less right.

    You mis-remember the 2008 election then, because a major theme in the Dem primary that year was who had better judgement in the run-up to war.  Hillary got smoked by her previous bad choice.  It wasn't the ONLY reason Obama won (as I said, "part of"), but it helped a virtual unknown take out a seasoned vet.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    No it was not worth it.  It`s pretty easy to say that now.  Last night I watched Hillary`s speech on Oct 22, 2002.  She spoke strongly of Saddam`s WMD and the threat that he was to the area and to his own people.  She spoke of the 100`s of thousands of Iraqis he had killed with WMD, and she was adamant about his removal and support for Resolution 114.

     

     

    Hence, part of the reason she lost in 2008...

    ...to an unknown state senator who gave a speech a few weeks earlier in 2002 taking the position against military action.

    Hate if you must, but it turned out he was right.

     

     

     

     




     

    Who hates?  He got lucky.  Hillary, Bill, Gore, Lieberman, Kennedy (who gave a very specific speech about WMD), Kerry, Edwards, Dodd, Daschel, .......and 40 nations were all for Iraq.  And let`s not forget the vote:

    House 300-134

    Senate 77-23

    Yes, this incompetent got lucky and got it right.  If you think that`s why Hillary lost to him, you`re out of your mind.

     

     



    So, every one of those 157 congress critters AND the current president, who advised against the Iraq War were "lucky"...?  That's pretty weak.  Does that make the rest "unlucky"...just victims of the unfortunate circumstance of being wrong...?

     

    The panoply who favored invasion are beside the point; they have their own consciences to deal with.  That doesn't make the people who got it right any less right.

    You mis-remember the 2008 election then, because a major theme in the Dem primary that year was who had better judgement in the run-up to war.  Hillary got smoked by her previous bad choice.  It wasn't the ONLY reason Obama won (as I said, "part of"), but it helped a virtual unknown take out a seasoned vet.

     




    Gonna need a link for your "idea" that it had something (anything) to do with him beating her.  I just spent 30 minutes looking and, according to most pundits, writers, newsfolk, and, well........anyone that reported on the 2008 primaries, I can`t find anything.  Not saying there weren`t people against war and any candidates supporting it,.......just saying that nobody thinks it`s the reason she lost.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    No it was not worth it.  It`s pretty easy to say that now.  Last night I watched Hillary`s speech on Oct 22, 2002.  She spoke strongly of Saddam`s WMD and the threat that he was to the area and to his own people.  She spoke of the 100`s of thousands of Iraqis he had killed with WMD, and she was adamant about his removal and support for Resolution 114.

     

     

    Hence, part of the reason she lost in 2008...

    ...to an unknown state senator who gave a speech a few weeks earlier in 2002 taking the position against military action.

    Hate if you must, but it turned out he was right.

     

     

     

     




     

    Who hates?  He got lucky.  Hillary, Bill, Gore, Lieberman, Kennedy (who gave a very specific speech about WMD), Kerry, Edwards, Dodd, Daschel, .......and 40 nations were all for Iraq.  And let`s not forget the vote:

    House 300-134

    Senate 77-23

    Yes, this incompetent got lucky and got it right.  If you think that`s why Hillary lost to him, you`re out of your mind.

     

     



    So, every one of those 157 congress critters AND the current president, who advised against the Iraq War were "lucky"...?  That's pretty weak.  Does that make the rest "unlucky"...just victims of the unfortunate circumstance of being wrong...?

     

    The panoply who favored invasion are beside the point; they have their own consciences to deal with.  That doesn't make the people who got it right any less right.

    You mis-remember the 2008 election then, because a major theme in the Dem primary that year was who had better judgement in the run-up to war.  Hillary got smoked by her previous bad choice.  It wasn't the ONLY reason Obama won (as I said, "part of"), but it helped a virtual unknown take out a seasoned vet.

     

     




     

    Gonna need a link for your "idea" that it had something (anything) to do with him beating her.  I just spent 30 minutes looking and, according to most pundits, writers, newsfolk, and, well........anyone that reported on the 2008 primaries, I can`t find anything.  Not saying there weren`t people against war and any candidates supporting it,.......just saying that nobody thinks it`s the reason she lost.



    Don't you remember the debates...?  The '3AM call'...?  The whole campaign was about contrasts to the Bush years and the many, many mistakes made during it - the Iraq War naturally being the biggest one.

    And part of the criticism against Obama from the Clintonites was 'well, he wasn't in congress to vote on it.  we were.'  And Barack volleyed, 'if I was, then maybe it wouldn't have happened.'  Classic.

    Look harder.

    Repeat: not "THE" reason, but "A" reason she lost....

     

    I know it's hard for you to attribute anything at all positive or complimentary to 44, but there isn't much question that his judgement at the time was correct.  Trillions of dollars and ten years later, he's the one stuck with cleaning up the mess....

     

     

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from MattyScornD. Show MattyScornD's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    Trillions of dollars and ten years later, he's the one stuck with cleaning up the mess....



    And, miraculously, getting blamed for it.

     



    That's partisanship for you in a nutshell.

    Never mind that some of the same dim bulbs are dredging up the exact same arguments for invading Syria and/or Iran.  The dissonance is astounding.

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from miscricket. Show miscricket's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    No..it was not worth it. The cost was too great in almost every way imaginable.

     
  10. This post has been removed.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from slomag. Show slomag's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    No it was not worth it.  It`s pretty easy to say that now.  Last night I watched Hillary`s speech on Oct 22, 2002.  She spoke strongly of Saddam`s WMD and the threat that he was to the area and to his own people.  She spoke of the 100`s of thousands of Iraqis he had killed with WMD, and she was adamant about his removal and support for Resolution 114.

     

     

    Hence, part of the reason she lost in 2008...

    ...to an unknown state senator who gave a speech a few weeks earlier in 2002 taking the position against military action.

    Hate if you must, but it turned out he was right.

     

     

     

     




     

    Who hates?  He got lucky.  Hillary, Bill, Gore, Lieberman, Kennedy (who gave a very specific speech about WMD), Kerry, Edwards, Dodd, Daschel, .......and 40 nations were all for Iraq.  And let`s not forget the vote:

    House 300-134

    Senate 77-23

    Yes, this incompetent got lucky and got it right.  If you think that`s why Hillary lost to him, you`re out of your mind.

     




    Let's set the record straight here...

    House:
    Reps: 215 - 6
    Dems: 82 - 126

    Senate:
    Reps: 48 - 1
    Dems: 29 - 21

    Boy, those Dems sure are lucky.  

    And of the forty nations who supported the invasion, only 6 (including US & UK) actually sent troops to fight.  

     

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from ImYourDaddy. Show ImYourDaddy's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to slomag's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    No it was not worth it.  It`s pretty easy to say that now.  Last night I watched Hillary`s speech on Oct 22, 2002.  She spoke strongly of Saddam`s WMD and the threat that he was to the area and to his own people.  She spoke of the 100`s of thousands of Iraqis he had killed with WMD, and she was adamant about his removal and support for Resolution 114.

     

     

    Hence, part of the reason she lost in 2008...

    ...to an unknown state senator who gave a speech a few weeks earlier in 2002 taking the position against military action.

    Hate if you must, but it turned out he was right.

     

     

     

     




     

    Who hates?  He got lucky.  Hillary, Bill, Gore, Lieberman, Kennedy (who gave a very specific speech about WMD), Kerry, Edwards, Dodd, Daschel, .......and 40 nations were all for Iraq.  And let`s not forget the vote:

    House 300-134

    Senate 77-23

    Yes, this incompetent got lucky and got it right.  If you think that`s why Hillary lost to him, you`re out of your mind.

     

     




     

    Let's set the record straight here...

    House:
    Reps: 215 - 6
    Dems: 82 - 126

    Senate:
    Reps: 48 - 1
    Dems: 29 - 21

    Boy, those Dems sure are lucky.  

    And of the forty nations who supported the invasion, only 6 (including US & UK) actually sent troops to fight.  

     




    Set what  record straight ?...that it was supported by majority of  congress and the world?

    40 country supported ... so what if only 6 countries sent troops ... how many countries actually have troops to deploy or have big enough military to lend support??

    were you ok with operation desert fox? is ok because Clinton did it?

     

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from ImYourDaddy. Show ImYourDaddy's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to WhatDoYouWantNow's comment:

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    Trillions of dollars and ten years later, he's the one stuck with cleaning up the mess....



    And, miraculously, getting blamed for it.

     




    And micaculously, getting credit of killy Bin Laden

     
  17. This post has been removed.

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to slomag's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    No it was not worth it.  It`s pretty easy to say that now.  Last night I watched Hillary`s speech on Oct 22, 2002.  She spoke strongly of Saddam`s WMD and the threat that he was to the area and to his own people.  She spoke of the 100`s of thousands of Iraqis he had killed with WMD, and she was adamant about his removal and support for Resolution 114.

     

     

    Hence, part of the reason she lost in 2008...

    ...to an unknown state senator who gave a speech a few weeks earlier in 2002 taking the position against military action.

    Hate if you must, but it turned out he was right.

     

     

     

     




     

    Who hates?  He got lucky.  Hillary, Bill, Gore, Lieberman, Kennedy (who gave a very specific speech about WMD), Kerry, Edwards, Dodd, Daschel, .......and 40 nations were all for Iraq.  And let`s not forget the vote:

    House 300-134

    Senate 77-23

    Yes, this incompetent got lucky and got it right.  If you think that`s why Hillary lost to him, you`re out of your mind.

     

     




     

    Let's set the record straight here...

    House:
    Reps: 215 - 6
    Dems: 82 - 126

    Senate:
    Reps: 48 - 1
    Dems: 29 - 21

    Boy, those Dems sure are lucky.  

    And of the forty nations who supported the invasion, only 6 (including US & UK) actually sent troops to fight.  

     

     


    (QUOTE)

     

    Thanks for proving my point and finally agreeing.  Resolution 114 was voted on and supported by LARGE MAJORITIES in both Houses.

    And.......oh yah, it was a bi-partisan bill authored by Daschel(D) and Lott(R)

     

    You might also consider a search of "Democrats voting for, and in favor of Iraq war".  You will see hundreds of papers, speeches, statements, interviews, etc.............going back to the late 1980`s and right up to 2003, ALL speaking to WMD and taking out Saddam.

     

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    In response to MattyScornD's comment:

     

    In response to tacobreath's comment:

     

    No it was not worth it.  It`s pretty easy to say that now.  Last night I watched Hillary`s speech on Oct 22, 2002.  She spoke strongly of Saddam`s WMD and the threat that he was to the area and to his own people.  She spoke of the 100`s of thousands of Iraqis he had killed with WMD, and she was adamant about his removal and support for Resolution 114.

     

     

    Hence, part of the reason she lost in 2008...

    ...to an unknown state senator who gave a speech a few weeks earlier in 2002 taking the position against military action.

    Hate if you must, but it turned out he was right.

     

     

     

     




     

    Who hates?  He got lucky.  Hillary, Bill, Gore, Lieberman, Kennedy (who gave a very specific speech about WMD), Kerry, Edwards, Dodd, Daschel, .......and 40 nations were all for Iraq.  And let`s not forget the vote:

    House 300-134

    Senate 77-23

    Yes, this incompetent got lucky and got it right.  If you think that`s why Hillary lost to him, you`re out of your mind.

     

     



    So, every one of those 157 congress critters AND the current president, who advised against the Iraq War were "lucky"...?  That's pretty weak.  Does that make the rest "unlucky"...just victims of the unfortunate circumstance of being wrong...?

     

    The panoply who favored invasion are beside the point; they have their own consciences to deal with.  That doesn't make the people who got it right any less right.

    You mis-remember the 2008 election then, because a major theme in the Dem primary that year was who had better judgement in the run-up to war.  Hillary got smoked by her previous bad choice.  It wasn't the ONLY reason Obama won (as I said, "part of"), but it helped a virtual unknown take out a seasoned vet.

     

     




     

    Gonna need a link for your "idea" that it had something (anything) to do with him beating her.  I just spent 30 minutes looking and, according to most pundits, writers, newsfolk, and, well........anyone that reported on the 2008 primaries, I can`t find anything.  Not saying there weren`t people against war and any candidates supporting it,.......just saying that nobody thinks it`s the reason she lost.

     



    Don't you remember the debates...?  The '3AM call'...?  The whole campaign was about contrasts to the Bush years and the many, many mistakes made during it - the Iraq War naturally being the biggest one.

     

    And part of the criticism against Obama from the Clintonites was 'well, he wasn't in congress to vote on it.  we were.'  And Barack volleyed, 'if I was, then maybe it wouldn't have happened.'  Classic.

    Look harder.

    Repeat: not "THE" reason, but "A" reason she lost....

     

    I know it's hard for you to attribute anything at all positive or complimentary to 44, but there isn't much question that his judgement at the time was correct.  Trillions of dollars and ten years later, he's the one stuck with cleaning up the mess....

     

     




    I remember the debates.  I pay attention.  What is funny is you thinking the misinformed, low-information people that voted for the incompetent have EVER watched a (any) debate.

    LOL!!!

    I`m not "looking harder"..........you should prove your statement.  You can`t.

     
  20. This post has been removed.

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from massmoderateJoe. Show massmoderateJoe's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    Well with complete 20/20 hindsight of course not.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

     

    My personal fave was when Obamby-ite Susan Rice told us that Obama had been pushing for withdrawal from Iraq "since 2002".  We didn't go there until 2003, of course, so Obama really is a god.

    (QUOTE)



    143 days in the Senate voting "present", and yet he had the wisdom and forsight to miraculously see the future and know that Iraq would be wrong.

     

    BWAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa!

    For the record, he also knew that $4.00 gas and $9 trillon debt would be wrong and campaigned on it repeatedly.  Where did that get us?

     

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from tacobreath. Show tacobreath's posts

    Re: March 20, 2003 Operation Iraqi Freedom ... 10 years later , was it worth it ?

    In response to GreginMeffa's comment:

    "I am the only person on this stage that did not vote in favor of invading Iraq" - B. Obama, January 3, 2008, Democrat debate.

    A.  Thats because you COULDN"T vote.  State senators weren't asked.

    B.  Bil Richarson wasn't asked either, and he was standing next to you.




    I wish he could have told us about the Pats.  Maybe he knows the Powerball numbers?

     
  25. This post has been removed.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share