President Bush and his top policymakers exaggerated Saddam Hussein’s links to terrorism, according to the long, long-awaited final “phase II” report released today by the Senate Intelligence Committee. The 171-page report also says that intelligence reports at the time supported most of the administration’s statements about Iraq’s weapons (since proved untrue), but that the administration didn’t disclose the internal debate about the accuracy of that intelligence.
“The president and his advisers undertook a relentless public campaign in the aftermath of the (Sept. 11) attacks to use the war against al-Qaida as a justification for overthrowing Saddam Hussein,” Committee Chairman Jay Rockefeller, D-W.Va., said in written commentary on the report. “Representing to the American people that the two had an operational partnership and posed a single, indistinguishable threat was fundamentally misleading and led the nation to war on false pretenses.”
Most, though not all, of the Republicans on the committee objected to the findings and issued a minority report noting that Democrats were also wrong about the Iraq threat. But the committee’s findings match former White House press secretary Scott McClellan’s account of how the administration conducted a misleading campaign to sell the war.
89 Comments
Tell us something we didn’t already know. But it’s nice to finally know what Pat Roberts didn’t want Americans to know.
At this point -
No kidding.
I’m sure there is no exagerration by the reporters nor the Democrats about the report. :roll:
It reminds me of a Benny Hill Show where the show a sign of an unfortunately badly aligned words.
“Dr. Alex Love, The rapist”
of course, for those who don’t get it, it should have read:
“Dr. Alex Love, Therapist”
DUH!!!!!!
No wonder brown-nose Pat Roberts kept it under wraps for so long!
Ya see, there’s Truth, and then there’s BushTruth- don’t get them confused!
As the Prez said: ” I believe in Truthenating, and do it all the time. It’s just some times I have to adjust it a toad!
And John Sidney McCain the Third (for 3rd Bush term) voted along with every one of Shrub’s lies and changing goalposts for “success.”
The most under-reported story of the week, BTW, is is this one:
In spite of McSame securing the Republic Party’s nomination, thousands of people turned up in South Dakota and Montana this week to actually vote in the Gone Old (as in really old) Party primary, and McCoot couldn’t get more than 70% of the vote!
The Paul-bearers voted against him. The Huccabites voted against him.
For all the Cons’ talk about a “liberal” media, do you really think a liberal equivalent to Faux Noise Channel wouldn’t have pummeled us with the news that the Republic Party nominee can’t get get a landslide victory even after he’s won the nomination?!
The Republic Party is becoming about as relevant as the Whigs.
Let’s see. It took the Democrats over a year and and a half after they took power to release the report. That would destroy the ignorant arguments that Sen Pat Roberts was causing a delay in it’s release.
I hope we have televised debates between Slattery and Pat The Cover-Up-Artist Roberts.
Sucks to be a Republican with a war criminal president tied to your butts while you slop through the entrails of a failed administration.
Who had control of the report when it was in Pat Roberts’ hands? When the Democrats gained power, did Roberts voluntarily hand over the report or did the Democrats have to drag him kicking and screaming to give it up? Nothing in Congress is done overnight, unless they are voting themselves a big fat pay raise.
Here’s some additional material regarding the White House’s outright lies in the run-up to the Iraq invasion:
***********************************************
“In some cases, the administration made statements that were not backed up at all, the report found.
“Statements by the President and the Vice President indicating that Saddam Hussein was prepared to give weapons of mass destruction to terrorist groups for attacks against the United States were contradicted by available intelligence information,” the report concluded.
Among the reports conclusions:
Claims by President Bush that Iraq and al Qaida had a partnership “were not substantiated by the intelligence.”
The president and vice president misrepresented what was known about Iraq’s chemical weapons capabiliies.
Rumsfeld misrepresented what the intelligence community knew when he said Iraq’s weapons productions facilities were buried deeply underground.
Cheney’s claim that the intelligence community had confirmed that lead Sept. 11 hijacker Mohammed Atta had met an Iraqi intelligence officer in Prague in 2001 was not true.”
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/244/story/39963.html
***********************************************
Oh, and outlander? Only in your universe would Jay Rockefeller’s foot-dragging let Pat Roberts off the hook.
What’s really interesting, of course, is that Roberts isn’t even a member of the Intelligence Committee AT ALL. He resigned when Democrats took power in 2006. I wonder why?
Lets see…
The Democrats, who have been openly attacking the President on the war for some time now, take control of this “report” and now they issue it.
I am not surprised because I exepcted the findings to be true.
I am not surprised BECAUSE of course the Democrats would realease a report like this.
The only “DUH” here is that the Democrats have just as much of a political agenda here as anyone does.
What is happening in Washington is no longer about the truth or what actually happened. It is about scoring political points any way you can.
Actually, Nathan, the report only confirms what most people have known for years: Bush and Cheney used the presidency to further their war agenda. Remember what Powell told Bush prior to the war when he was trying to talk Bush out of it: “You break it; you bought it.”
Those words are now comming back to haunt this so-called administration. There are no points scored when the truth is told, only dead soldiers, and that’s the problem you don’t seem to understand.
JM Walker,
Don’t lecture me about dead soldiers. I know all about the cost of war.
The Democrats have used this war to exploit political success for themselves.
Now it is about doing what is right not constantly looking at the past and nit picking the evidence.
Most people have not “known” anything for years. They have been beaten down with accusations and insinuations by the liberals and people like you.
Instead of focusing on the success of the mission, all people like you do is try to drag it down.
You encourage and embolden our enemy and then you sit here trying to lecture me on dead soldiers as if you care?
You idiot Nathan. You expect us to just ignore what we had known all along? Its not our fault that you’re so stupid to listen to Bush. WE KNEW he was a fraud, and you still won’t fess up.
“right not constantly looking at the past and nit picking the evidence.”
As Americans, we have an absolute right to know why we got into this war. It is “WE the PEOPLE” not whatever the government wants to tell us.
As Americans, it is our duty to hold our elected leaders and our government accountable.
Any thing less is tantamount to treason.
Political Mama,
What did you know all along? I didn’t listen to Bush. I listened to the intelligence which all pointed to Saddam still working on WMD programs. Only now, in hindsight, do we see how wrong those intelligence estimates were.
Now you sit here acting like a pompus donkey.
I admit what mistakes were actually made, not all the BS that you liberals have been throwing around for political points.
Well, Mr. Price, tell us what the War of Choice on Iraq had to do with terrorism…….. Please.
WS Clark,
What war is not a choice?
Guess we’ll learn more when Congress subpoenas Feith, Atkinson, Wolfowitz, and all the subordinates who worked for them and can’t wait to tell the truth. Maybe we’ll find the smoking guns of intentional deception. I assume all the culprits will plead the Fifth. (A new attorney general is not going to refuse his/her job, as the current Bush appointee is doing.)
Only now, in hindsight, do we see how wrong those intelligence estimates were.
Now you sit here acting like a pompus donkey.
That is inaccurate. The findings are that Bush knew and suppressed information.
Nathaniel
Posted June 5, 2008 at 3:47 pm | Permalink
WS Clark,
What war is not a choice?
Within the general useage a war such as WW2 of Afghanistan would not be wars of choice. The reason – we were attacked. Now, before you jump to the usual Rightie “but why fight Germany?” remember that Germany DECLARED WAR on the United States.
This is a different situation from the bottled up and contained toothless Saddam thug. Even Cheney, Powell and Rumsfield knew that such a war was folly – they so advised Bush 1.
Sorry Nathan but you were sent to fight and kill innocents at the whim of the oil cartels.
You are a loser.
Congress should start with McClellen – he is turning State’s evidence. I just LOVE seeing Bush-rats chew each other up.
“bth” suggests –
“Congress should start with McClellen – he is turning State’s evidence.”
Actually, Scott McClellan should be the final witness, since all the evidence has been brought up before. McClellan simply ties it up together.
Scott McClellan started out as a “true believer” in Shrub. He was an insider during Dumbya’s governorship. He was the only Press Secretary in this administration who had “walk-in” privileges to the Oval Office. He was among that cluster of Texans — Rove, Karen Hughes, McClellan… — who weren’t just drinking, they were mixing the Bushevik Kool-Aid.
It reminds me, oddly enough, of the OJ Simpson case. I went into the trial thinking there was no way possible OJ would have been so stupid to kill Nicole and Ron Goldman. But sometimes you hear the evidence and you’ve gotta be convinced.
The Bushies refuse to believe the preponderance of evidence before them, just like the OJ defenders. Most rational people can face the facts and change their opinions. Only the true-believers can look at Shrub (or OJ) and still stick to their prejudices: that their guy couldn’t be guilty of what they know he’s done.
Jon Stewart nailed it when he cited all those Bushies who whined, “This is not the Scott McClellan we knew.” No! The Scott McClellan we knew could lie like a motherfuc#er!!
#
Nathaniel
Posted June 5, 2008 at 3:20 pm | Permalink
JM Walker,
Don’t lecture me about dead soldiers. I know all about the cost of war.
The Democrats have used this war to exploit political success for themselves.
Now it is about doing what is right not constantly looking at the past and nit picking the evidence.
Most people have not “known” anything for years. They have been beaten down with accusations and insinuations by the liberals and people like you.
Instead of focusing on the success of the mission, all people like you do is try to drag it down.
You encourage and embolden our enemy and then you sit here trying to lecture me on dead soldiers as if you care?
================================================
Bull S**t, Nathan,
This stuff has been known for years by anybody who knows how to read. What gets me is your continuing to kowtow to Bush and his war mentality, and you straw-man bs calling anyone who disagrees with you as “encourage and embolden our enemy.” We wouldn’t have an enemy in Iraq if the truth had been known from the start about this regime’s war mentality, and the lengths they are willing to go to to get their way. They got it, for no reason, and soldiers died. That, to me, is treason. Putting our finest in harms way over cooked intelligence is treason. Standing up and calling the war wrong is what makes this country great. Killing tin pot dictators does absolutely nothing but cause problems.
You want to talk about WMD? How about North Korea? Why aren’t we invading them? They probably have nukes, and the missiles to deliver them. China? Hell yes, they got em. Pakistan? Samo-samo. Iraq did bad things to their people? Hell, China makes Iraq look like a Sunday school.
Iraq was wrong on so many levels, it’s ridiculous. And we elected to bozos who did it.
“Now it is about doing what is right not constantly looking at the past and nit picking the evidence.”
Really? So just throw out the evidence? I’m sure a whole bunch of criminals would love that. And doing what is right? Like, what, send more soldiers into Iraq? Not if I have a vote. Thank God for America!
There was evidence before we ever went in there that the intel wasn’t accurate. BushCo and his supporters insisted that we were wrong. So KMA, it was there, he chose to lie. LIE.
And now you’re lying too.
JMWalker
Posted June 5, 2008 at 4:34 pm | Permalink
One excellent post, Walker!
“Who is the enemy we are fighting in Iraq?” is always a good first question, it seems to me.
There is a joke that circulates among Iraqis – they claim the ideal Iraq for the Bush administration would be one without Iraqis.
“Take the people, we’ll keep the oil.”
Nathaniel: I to know the price of war. I saw it as a young tanker at the company level. I saw more of the reality of war working at the G-3. If you had ever worked any higher than battalion level, you would know more of the reality of war. The politics, the diplomacy, the a$$ kissing we have to do to a country just so we can protect them. But you never saw that, so you still have this gung-ho gloried wet dream about manifest destiny. I somewhat envy you that you still have it. But reality is that you are just young and inexperienced.
“What war is not a choice?”
We were not attacked – we chose to go to war.
So, what did the War of Choice on Iraq have to do with terrorism and 9/11?
Congressional investigations?
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA!
Maybe they’ll write snotty a REALLY strong letter. Like they’ve done with every other bushie who thumbed their noses at their notices to appear.
I bet bushco minions are REALLY afraid of those STRONG letters from pelosi, reid and their blowhard committee chairs.
And you wonder why I support Cynthia?
I bought a beer last night for a jarhead who’s going back next week for his fourth tour in Iraq. And I wondered about “Nathaniel.”
“Nathaniel” went over there once, and the Marines don’t want him back.
This kid I shared beers with was everything you’d expect from a Marine. Not fearless, but willing to face the fear. Not violent, but ready to deal with violence. Not particularly a scholar, but had thought long and hard about what he was fighting for.
He was fighting for the commitment he’d made to his country, his corps, his buddies. “I didn’t sign up to decide what is right or wrong,” he said. “I signed up to walk into Hell, if need be, because others decided that’s what a Marine’s supposed to do.”
I continue to wonder why the Marines don’t want “Nathaniel” back.
Thanks VET an MH. Your comments bring to mind the bitterness I heard from many vets ‘back in the day’ when they pondered the worthless mission their civilian ‘leadership’ (sic) had sent them into. They had gone over to Nam gung-ho; they came back the exact opposite. These were brave men who had been on the front lines; not back on base.
A .pdf of the Senate Report:
http://intelligence.senate.gov/080605/phase2b.pdf
This second is the Senate Report on “Whether Statements Regarding Iraq by U.S. Government Officials were Substaniated by Intelligence Information.”
http://intelligence.senate.gov/080605/phase2a.pdf
“I continue to wonder why the Marines don’t want ‘Nathaniel’ back.”
He posted that they don’t require what he is trained in at this time. What I wondered is, if they are as desperate for people as they seem to be, why don’t they re-train Nathan in a specialty they need more often?
George Galloway, testifying before a sham hearing in Congress–
I gave my heart and soul to stop you committing the disaster that you did commit in invading Iraq, and I told the world that your case for the war was a pack of lies. I told the world that Iraq, contrary to your claims, did not have weapons of mass destruction. I told the world , contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to al Qaeda. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that Iraq had no connection to the attrocity on 9/11, 2001. I told the world, contrary to your claims, that the Iraqi people would resist a British and American invasion in their country and that the fall of Baghdad would not be the beginning of the end, but merely the end of the beginning. Senator, in everything I said about Iraq, I turned out to be right and you turned out to be wrong and 100,000 people have paid with their lives — 1,600 of them American soldiers sent to their deaths on a pack of lies. 15,000 of them wounded, many of them disabled forever, on a pack of lies.
Uh, folks . . .
I disagree with Nathan, but I don’t want anybody sent back there to die for our new American Empire, or what’s just as bad, to kill for it.
I think ragging on Nathan for not being in an effing war zone is not an appropriate comment to direct at anyone, Lib or Con.
I would rather someone be there that supports the war than one who doesn’t support the war and would rather be home.
While I disagree with Nathan on many things, I would stand up for him in a nano-second. Military wise, I do consider him a true American hero. That is not negotiable.
The fact that Bush lied is only news to those who are planning on voting for McCain in 2008. Republicans have time and time again proven they have no competence on issues of foreign affairs and the military.
“I continue to wonder why the Marines don’t want “Nathaniel” back.”
One of my friends has her boyfriend going back for a third duty, another friend is going back again as well. When the military has to call back wounded vets and enlists grandmothers but tells Nathan to stay home then that does tell you something.
You’d think with all the chest thumping and eagerness to see his fellow soldiers get killed that he’d be begging to return.
The War in Iraq is accomplishing exactly what Al Qaeda / Osama Bin Laden intended —– trying to defeat us by ruining our economy —– 911 was the first step — cost a 500 billion dollar hit on the economy, (their return on investment was about 1000 to 1 (it cost them 500k to plan and execute 911) 2nd step was to make us pour tons of money into defense — money that couldn’t grow the economy —- and now a cost of the war and speculation has caused our fuel costs to skyrocket —- to further impede the economy —- and all because Bush and the Bandits took there eye off Osdama —-
The military doesn’t allow gay soldiers once they find out.
Sen. Roberts needs to be called on the carpet for his concealing bush’s lies as head of the SIC. I believe all but three Repubs. on the committee signed off on the report!
Repubs. are trying Partisan Pat’s technique of calling the report partisan politics. When in truth the real partisanship comes into play in denouncing the investigation as partisan.
The above paragraph and technique is enough to confuse any Republican and achieve the desired results!
When Partisan Pat could no longer control/suppress the outcome of the investigation, he took a walk, hoping to be far away by the time his favorite fund raises was denounced officially.
These accusations are too serious to end with a new administration, and need to be followed up on in the future.
Waiting for an answer from ?Nathaniel…..
So, what did the War of Choice on Iraq have to do with terrorism and 9/11?
I guess he is waiting for Rush Limbaugh to give him a suitable reply. Or maybe Ann “the Man” Coulter or Glenn Beck or or Bill O’Reilly or Brit Hume or Sean “They’re in Syria!” Hannity.
9/11, Al-Quida, Saddam, 9/11, Saddam, Al-Quida. It doesn’t take much to achieve guilt by association, and is very effective when the fear level and anger is high to start with.
The real shame is sending people who are blindly loyal to their oath and country to die for a lie.
“So, what did the War of Choice on Iraq have to do with terrorism and 9/11?”
The answer: In order to placate the Saudis (who spawned 9/11) we attacked their enemy. The hope was to so ingratiate ourselves with the House of Saud that they would cease their support for alQuada.
However, it backfired. The Sauds have now helped to establish another outpost of alQuada in Iraq. And, they have us bogged down there while alQuada grows elsewhere. To make matters worse Iraq’s other old enemy, Iran, has also been strengthened.
Years ago when it was suggested that Bush focus on trying to solve the Palestinian issue he said “The road to Jeruselum goes through Baghdad.” He explained that once he had established a prosperous Jeffersonian democracy there that everything else would follow.
Instead, our enemies are finding that he was correct – but in reverse. The chaos Bush spawned in Baghdad is now infecting and destabalizing the entire region.
MISSION ACCOMPLSHED!
“noting that Democrats were also wrong about the Iraq threat”
Yep, those dirty dishonest democrats in congress voted to go to war too! Liars one and all. They read the same intelligence reports.
Worst Congress Ever.
“They read the same intelligence reports.”
No they didn’t – most did not have clearance to read Classified intel – they read EDITED intelligence reports.
Edited by the Bush Administration.
I think we were trying to appease The House of Saud, by setting up in Iraq and drawing off their home grown fanatics which threatened the Kingdom.
Not true Clark. Those on the senate/house intelligence commitities had access and need to know.
No excuse. They voted, “AYE”
“I think ragging on Nathan for not being in an effing war zone is not an appropriate comment to direct at anyone, Lib or Con.”
I would completely agree. Nathan can be a bit weird, but so can we all. I would hope he can graduate from WSU with degrees in EE and computer science. My friend did the same thing and works for H.P. The dude makes some serious money.
I hope Nathan can contribute to our economy rather than losing his life for basically nothing other than Bush hegemony.
I apologize if anyone thought I meant anything differently from the above.
Steven Davis
“Well, Mr. Price, tell us what the War of Choice on Iraq had to do with terrorism…….. Please.”
Well, we’re still waiting, Nathan.
Please enlighten us to the success in Irag and how we’re winning the war against terrorism by spending trillions invading a country that was never a threat to us. Please be specific…don’t try to avoid the question by turning the question around.
Nevermind, Nathan has left the thread….running away as usual when he’s backed into a corner and has no rationale for his opinion.
Chuckle… Mary, Nathan hasn’t posted on this thread for about 7 hours. I doubt he can here your chest thumping.
Is it OK to say that to a lady?
“Those on the senate/house intelligence commitities had access and need to know.”
Bullshit. They received reports prepared by the Bush administration – not the raw data.
Nice try, but this is strictly Bush’s War.
Hey, Mary,
We’re going a different way on this thread in regard to Nathan. We owe him thanks. He did nothing other than what our representatives (or us) asked/ordered him to do. We are to blame for the failures of our government. I think America has got the message/lesson. We will soon see.
Let’s hope so.
Outlander…he’s out there..he just doesn’t know how to defend his statements.
It’s typical Nathan. When he can’t back up his claims, he just leaves the thread, never to appear again until the next topic is posted.
After thinking about it Steve, I don’t owe Nathan any thanks. He’s part of this war machine for which I have no respect. I’m sick and tired of how we make heros out of everyone just because they’re in the military. Maybe if we didn’t glorify military service so much, fewer kids would be so willing to risk their lives or die for this unnecessary and ill conceived war fought for the enrichment of the greedy few who would never consider “dying for their country”.
I’m so sick of it all.
“strictly Bush’s War”
Sorry, but congress voted for the war, along with strong statements by Hillary Clinton, senator New York.
Don’t let the newspapers provide cover.
This is important because if we fail to learn from the mistakes – they are bound to be repeated.
Congress knows the drill – their leadership, at any time in history, has a responsibility when using their VOTE OF AYE to commit US troops to war. Obviously, Obama knew better.
Guess the other democrats were just fools?
American Way,
“Yep, those dirty dishonest democrats in congress voted to go to war too! Liars one and all. They read the same intelligence reports.”
Nope. Bush kept them from ever hearing from George Tenet and senior CIA folks that Iraq had no WMD.
“Bush knew Saddam had no weapons of mass destruction
Salon exclusive: Two former CIA officers say the president squelched top-secret intelligence, and a briefing by George Tenet, months before invading Iraq.
By Sidney Blumenthal
Sep. 06, 2007 | On Sept. 18, 2002, CIA director George Tenet briefed President Bush in the Oval Office on top-secret intelligence that Saddam Hussein did not have weapons of mass destruction, according to two former senior CIA officers. Bush dismissed as worthless this information from the Iraqi foreign minister, a member of Saddam’s inner circle, although it turned out to be accurate in every detail. Tenet never brought it up again.
Nor was the intelligence included in the National Intelligence Estimate of October 2002, which stated categorically that Iraq possessed WMD. No one in Congress was aware of the secret intelligence that Saddam had no WMD as the House of Representatives and the Senate voted, a week after the submission of the NIE, on the Authorization for Use of Military Force in Iraq. The information, moreover, was not circulated within the CIA among those agents involved in operations to prove whether Saddam had WMD.”
http://www.salon.com/opinion/blumenthal/2007/09/06/bush_wmd/print.html
So, American Way, while I blame Congress for creating the monster that is Bush, it is flatly false to assign equal shares of responsibilty on the issue of pre-war intelligence. Bush squelched any evidence contrary to his desire to go to war. End of story.
Not running away…just going to bed. It’s been hell week at work and I’m tired.
“I don’t owe Nathan any thanks.”
And Mary’s true colors come out – she is part of the generation who spit on our servicemen and women.
Glo paint, tie-dyed shirts, and one pill makes you larger/and one pill makes you small.. Peace signs.
Mary’s true heart.
Take care mary, and AMWAY, go sell some soap punk.
I like Powell. When I think back to 02-03, my mindset was totally different because of 9/11. I went along with the President because I feared for my country, and felt the pre-emptive issue might very well be what it was going to take in order to show those arabs whose boss.
Now that my head is clear, I feel that Saddam was one of our best assets in the middle east. He kept Iran in check, and we had him locked in a box so that he wasn’t a substantial threat to us.
We are supposed to support the idea of Democracy for the entire world, but is it really best when the majority would vote to burn the US to the ground? Maybe a contained leader, or dictator who we can control is better for us, because we have to deal with one guy to manage the situation, instead of the helter skelter we have in Iraq right now.
Besides defending Kuwait, Saddam had little issue with us. And Saddam had some very real complaints about Kuwait drilling horizontally into Iraqi oil reserves, that the US ignored, because Kuwait played ball with the US and kept the oil flowing. If we would have mediated a solution, instead of reaping the benefits of more free flowing oil, Saddam wouldn’t have been able to justify the invasion, even though he also wanted the port, and to reclaim land from ancient times.
9/11 should have been the launching point for the US to change it’s way of life, instead of for a war. It was a time when the President could have told us we had to become energy independant, regardless of what bumps in the road we encounter. Hybrid technology was already developed, but it was put on the shelf due to low oil prices. Toyota and Honda didn’t have to do alot to bring it to market, it was on the shelf. GM has taken their biggest gas guzzlers and massaged them into a combined fuel economy rating of 21mpg by using some very simple hybrid technology which shuts off the engine when the car is not removing, using braking to regenerate the battarys, and cylinder deactivation to improve highway mileage.
We needed to get started on more nuclear, wind, and solar power. After Katrina, many area’s should have been left for developing the growing of sugar cane for gasoline. The US has spent millions showing Brazil how to grow soybeans, and we could have turned to an ally to provide the diesel fuel soybeans can make.
The money we will spend on this war will exceed the costs of changing. The price you pay at the pump, guess what, you are really paying more, even more than Europe when one factors in the costs incurred maintaining such a massive military industrial complex, which provides the equipment needed for … you guessed it, defending our oil interests abroad.
Becoming energy independant and getting out of the middle east is the lesson we should have learned from 9/11. It would have been a way to create a new economy, as the internet did in the 90’s. It would have given us a way to compete with China, who would still be relying on those crazy arabs for oil. (boy wouldn’t they be in trouble if they had to deal with China instead of the US!)
I’m not an expert either, but I do have a little common sense. And the lefties have their fair share of the blame also. They have done much to keep this country from developing energy.
We broke it, we bought it! Now it’s a simple matter of killing as many of “them” as possible. I think the kill ratio is more then 15 to 1 our advantage. Since we are there, we need to kill as many of them as possible, and Americans need to stop being such whiney a$$ weaklings. As my hero Chesty Puller said when addressing congress back in the 50’s, “America is weak, and deserves to have a foreign force march on it’s land and take our women to breed a heartier race.” Ya just gotta love crazy Marines.
“Peace signs.”
Well, that clinches it – who the Hell would want PEACE?
That would be anti-American.
What a loser you are AmWay – a true Fleetwood level idiot.
Mary_Caruso
Posted June 5, 2008 at 10:45 pm | Permalink
As usual, Mary, that was one excellent post. I don’t believe I have ever confessed this, but Mary, you are the best, most honest, poster on this blog. I appreciate you for that.
On the “appreciating your service” issue, the Rude Pundit recently had an audio post where he said stuff like “why do I have to say thank you for your service to Tim McVey, before I say I did not like you burning to death toddlers…” He had a point on that. But what Tim McVey did after his service is different than what he had to do as part of it. Same for Nathn Price.
Our government makes mistakes. Not apologizing for that, by the way. But those who have no choice in making government mistakes should not be held to the same level of blame as our government (or us). My humble opinion only.
Bring Bush before a court and convict him, sentence him, I will be there cheering. It can happen and probably must to restore our standing in the world opinion.
“AMWAY, go sell some soap”
Struck a chord did I? The truth sucks doesn’t it?
We know libs pretend to support the troops but secretly loathe them.
You need the soap – you won’t get any under free healthcare either.
Any plan will require you to p.a.y..
Nothing in life or this country is free.
Even freedom.
God Bless Nathan and his service.
Mary,
I would never ask anyone for their thanks. I have met so many people who are greatful for not what it is that I do, but what all those of us in the military do.
To them, I merely represent someone in their life who they can thank when they are really thanking all those who have served.
Even though I don’t expect thanks, ask for it, or demand it, when someone like you throws it in my face that you don’t owe me any thanks as you did, it is insulting.
I suppose because I have known you for so long, that is why hearing you of all people say something like that, actually hurts.
…………
Good night
I simply cannot believe that people still defend this man who lives in the White House. He is an embarrassment to the name of the office and our country, regardless of his political party.
“I suppose because I have known you for so long…”
Honestly, Nathan, how long have you known Mary?
I’m going to bed, too. It is late.
I think a lot of those who joined the service did so shortly after 9/11, believing they were going to Afghanistan to take care of AQ. Nathan, wasn’t this a turning point for you, too? Our country was attacked. The first knee-jerk reaction is to retaliate as we did. But it wasn’t long before we were hoodwinked and told that Saddam was a part of it, and the rest is history. I can only hope that some have learned from this experience, but at what cost?
Congress did not vote for war. Congress voted to use military force. And only AFTER certain conditions were met. Those conditions were ignored by the Admnistration as it beat the drums of war and we invaded Iraq on not one, but multiple excuses, none of which had much basis in truth.
SemperFi, I appreciate you sharing your views. I definitely agree with you on the Kuwait thing. How long did it take we, the little people, to learn the truth about that?
The current Administration and those who were a part of it seven years ago, are not serving the people of this country–their sworn duty. They are self-serving. They are not protecting us. They are making us less safe.
How many lives have we ruined? Not just by death or serious injury, but mentally? All of those things not only touch the soldier or sailor, but reach far beyond to family and friends. If war is hell, why are we so quick to send others there?
And Mary’s true colors come out – she is part of the generation who spit on our servicemen and women.
I call bullshit.
Bush lied to the American people.
(As a vet, I would personally advise younger vets not to expect tangible appreciation for what you have done. Trust me, by and large the public — especially conservative Republicans — don’t really want to know; they can’t handle the truth. I speak from the perspective of a Vietnam vet. “It” is not about us. Hell, even McCain voted against the Webb GI Bill benefits!)
The important fact is: Bush lied.
I never spit on anyone…that’s more your style, American.
I just think that, like the propaganda that sold this war, we also give such great honor and praise to those who sign up, because without that element we’d be lacking the young people to fight our battles for us.
Sorry if I hurt your feelings, Nathan. Don’t take it personally, but you really aren’t “defending” our country with your service in Iraq. You simply carried out the orders of some very greedy and dishonest men who sold you a bag of goods about “keeping the war over there so we wouldn’t have to fight it here”. The truth is if we never invaded and overthrew Iraq’s government, they still wouldn’t have been a threat to us, and as a result of this huge mistake, thousands have died on both sides.
I appreciate anyone who is willing to serve their country…but I won’t heap praise and honor on those who CHOOSE to participate in an unethical and immoral war simply because they’ve been told to. I’ll simply pray for their safe return.
“Bring Bush before a court and convict him, sentence him, I will be there cheering. It can happen and probably must to restore our standing in the world opinion.”
————
The deluded left’s wet dream.
Bush’s prison will probably be in the form of voluntary house arrest near Caldwell, Texas. Kinda like Nixon’s last years, living in embarrassment and shame.
The military is just a machine, and bush is responsible for turning on the machine unnecessarilly.
And a last word…………………………….
In May of 2003, the conservatives where in full “I told you so” mode, hailing Bush as a “war hero” loudly claiming “Mission Accomplished” and proclaiming “victory.”
Those that opposed the war – me among them – were called traitors, un-American, terrorist sympathizers , etc. Some (Duke Cunningham) even suggested that we should be “lined up against a wall and shot.”
Now, that “victory” has proven to be a mirage, our predictions have come true and Bush has the lowest sustained approval ratings in history, now, right now, this very day…………………..
IT’S ALL THE DEMOCRATS FAULT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Yep, those stupid Democrats were gullible enough to believe George WMD Bush so the blame for this fiasco, this War of Choice on Iraq is THEIR FAULT.
Only in America.
A fine post by SemperFiGuy: “We are supposed to support the idea of Democracy for the entire world, but is it really best when the majority would vote to burn the US to the ground?”
You’ve hit the nail on the head. Here’s what Fearless Leader said about “democracy” in his last (and thank God! final) State of the Union Address:
“So we must come together, pass this agreement, and show our neighbors in the region [South America] that democracy leads to a better life.”
Unless that democracy leads to electing Hugo Chavez in Venezula. Then we need to plot to assassinate him.
“America’s leading the fight against global poverty with strong education initiatives and humanitarian assistance. We’ve also changed the way we deliver aid by launching the Millennium Challenge Account.
“This program strengthens democracy, transparency and the rule of law in developing nations, and I ask you to fully fund this important initiative.”
Because after all, we want to strengthen democracy in developing countries. Unless of course it’s in Palestine where they duly elected Hamas to represent them.
Then we spearhead a world-wide embargo to starve the government to death, which succeeded. We successfully overthrew their democratically elected government.
Just like we did in Nicaragua, in Lebanon, in Argentina, in Panama, in Iran etc. etc.
You either believe in the concept of a people to vote for their own leaders (democracy) or you don’t.
The CONs don’t. That’s why the only response they have to W. stealing the election in 2000 is to “get over it.”
Exactly, Clark!
It’s like blaming wife-beating on the wife. “She should have told him to stop it . . . “
Mary,
I do take it personally. Why would you of all people think that I wouldn’t take it personally?
You sit here telling me that my service to my country is in an immoral and unethical war and that you don’t owe me any thanks.
Just don’t pretend like you support the troops as all the other liberals say they do when it is now so cleraly obvious what disdain you actually have for them.
The Marine Corps job is Mission Accomplishment. You don’t get to pick and choose what wars you fight in. It is our job to follow orders.
You can still not like the war but respect and thank those of us who choose to enlist and protect this country regardless of if you think the particular war at the time is needed or not.
Mary_Caruso
Posted June 5, 2008 at 10:45 pm | Permalink
After thinking about it Steve, I don’t owe Nathan any thanks. He’s part of this war machine for which I have no respect. I’m sick and tired of how we make heros out of everyone just because they’re in the military. Maybe if we didn’t glorify military service so much, fewer kids would be so willing to risk their lives or die for this unnecessary and ill conceived war fought for the enrichment of the greedy few who would never consider “dying for their country”.
I’m so sick of it all.
———————
Well then Mary.
Let’s send your personal message to our troops around the world so they’ll really know what you think about them.
Ooops, too late, this is the Internet.
Iran wanted the US to topple Saddam – it served their interests:
“WASHINGTON — Defense Department counterintelligence investigators suspected that Iranian exiles who provided dubious intelligence on Iraq and Iran to a small group of Pentagon officials might have “been used as agents of a foreign intelligence service … to reach into and influence the highest levels of the U.S. government,” a Senate Intelligence Committee report said Thursday.
A top aide to then-secretary of defense Donald H. Rumsfeld, however, shut down the 2003 investigation into the Pentagon officials’ activities after only a month, and the Defense Department’s top brass never followed up on the investigators’ recommendation for a more thorough investigation, the Senate report said.
The revelation raises questions about whether Iran may have used a small cabal of officials in the Pentagon and in Vice President Dick Cheney’s office to feed bogus intelligence on Iraq and Iran to senior policymakers in the Bush administration who were eager to oust the Iraqi dictator.
Iran, which was a mortal enemy of Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein and fought a bloody eight-year war with Iraq during his reign, has been the primary beneficiary of U.S. policy in Iraq, where Iranian-backed groups now run much of the government and the security forces.”
http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/40080.html
Sorry fellas, can’t help how I feel. I respect anyone who gives service to this country, whether voluntarily or not…but I can’t support their efforts in an unnesessary war that cost our country trillions and thousands of lives on both sides of the conflict. Why would I throw confetti and cheer for those who supported and helped carry out something I’m totally against? While I don’t have “distain” for our soldiers like you want to believe, I’m not going to pretend to be proud because it’s the politically correct and popular thing to do.
You either support the war or not, and I don’t.
Reg…I’m not scared to let ANYONE know my opinions, and I’m not ashamed of how I feel. Maybe it’s people like you who should be ashamed that you would encourage and cheer on young men and women who have been manipulated into dying for such an unethical and costly political ego trip and greed feast.
“Mary_Caruso” –
We disagree on a lot of specifics of public policy, but I’ve never doubted your sincerity and passion for what you believe.
When I was a kid, returning ‘Nam vets guided me to protest that ugly war. They knew the kinds of guys they’d served with who bore such a grudge against their nation they desperately had to play the victim card. There wasn’t enough spittle on the planet to attack all of them, but they bought into the myth and have repeated those apocryphal lies for forty years.
They dealt with WWII veterans (and guys who claimed they’d “fought in the Big One…Korea!”) who more or less said, “If I had to do it, you have to do it,” without realizing The ‘Nam was a sham of a war. Just like this one we’re in right now.
In most of these discussions, the Bushies finally come around to the “They’re volunteers, so they have no right to bitch.” And, yes, the kids who have been sent to Iraq to die for George WMD Bush’s ego are “volunteers.” Just like the people who work at MacWal-Mart are “volunteers.”
For the vast majority of today’s military, it was simply an employment option. And Shrub’s contract-breaking (Stop-Loss, for example) is pure Republic Party disdain for employees; utter contempt for the job those brave young people signed up for.
Lincoln was so correct,”you can fool some of the people all the time.” This Administration has cooked the books just too long and finally got caught. So what do people do? They cry that it is just a political ploy and of course the Democrats are to blaim. We Democrats are so good that we had our President lie about intelligence leading to this war and continue to lie to protect other lies. We also have a Senior Senator, Pat Roberts, who has been running interference for these lies and the only thing he can say about his Democratic chalenger is he was a Guci wearing lobbiest.
To quote Mary “Nathan. Don’t take it personally, but you really aren’t “defending” our country with your service in Iraq….” Yes, it’s true, what she said, and that’s coming from a crazy Marine.
HOWEVER, we must have a military, that’s a fact. If we didn’t, the Republic would fail. Their are many who wish us harm, and they defend us from those people/forces. The blow hard politicians often view us in uniform as little toy soldiers to be played with at will. We are misused, abused, neglected, and thrown away like trash.
The fact that their are people like Nathan, who still put on that uniform, lace up their boots, and serve, despite all the negative, because they know it is necessary, even though 2/3 of the time, they are going to be used as pawns. Those sons and daughters who are willing to do what they do for the other 1/3 of the times when they may be needed to save the world so to speak, THEY ARE HEROS, EVERY ONE OF THEM. The situation being what it is only makes what they do more honorable. H#ll, anyone would go sign up to be a just hero who saves the world in a just war, but to make the sacrafice knowing that your going to be controlled by corrupt civilian leaders, to support their agendas, because someone has to be willing to do it for this country to exist! Those men and women who do that are the best we have, they are this countries finest!
I can tell you from my experience, I was part of something great, something honorable. The situation at hand wasn’t really the issue, but my buddy next to me was, my fellow Marines. When you have your d!ck in the dirt, and the bullets are flying, who cares why, you know you all just have to do what you have to do in order to get out alive. Which happens to be killing the enemy. Nobody’s thinking about geo-political issues in the heat of battle, they are thinking about staying alive.
We have been used to free ourselves from opression and become an independant nation, to keep the union in tact, to storm the beaches in the Pacific, to liberate Europe from Hitler, to fight the spread of communism, to stand on the wall and say “you ain’t coming here, this is our land”, and we have been used for pure bullcrap.
Either way, those who are willing to raise their right hand and swear that oath are the best this nation has!
2 Trackbacks
[...] Bush exaggerated links to terrorism, report finds “Representing to the American people that the two had an operational partnership and posed a single, indistinguishable threat was fundamentally misleading and led the nation to war on false pretenses.” Most, though not all, … [...]
[...] tagged exaggeratedOwn a Wordpress blog? Make monetization easier with the WP Affiliate Pro plugin. Bush exaggerated links to terrorism, report finds saved by 5 others sasuke20009976 bookmarked on 06/07/08 | [...]