Why isn't BUSH impeached?

[UNGN]

Originally posted by We4ster
Your Imminence awaits!

And on October 16 of last year, a reporter asked, "Ari, the President has been saying that the threat from Iraq is imminent, that we have to act now to disarm the country of its weapons of mass destruction, and that it has to allow the U.N. inspectors in, unfettered, no conditions, so forth." Fleischer replied, simply, "Yes."

Talk about spin.

Read the transcript on this. The reporter made a Statement:

"Ari, the President has been saying that the threat from Iraq is imminent, that we have to act now to disarm the country of its weapons of mass destruction, and that it has to allow the U.N. inspectors in, unfettered, no conditions, so forth. "

Ari said: "Yes?" as in "Ask a question"

The reporter continued "The chief U.N. inspector, however, is saying that, even under those conditions, it would be as much as a year before he could actually make a definitive report to the U.N. that Iraq is complying with the resolutions and allowing the inspections to take place. Isn't there a kind of a dichotomy? Can we wait a year, if it's so imminent we have to act now?"

Ari replied: " Well, that's why the President has gone to the United Nations to make certain that the conditions by which the inspectors would go back would be very different from the current terms that inspectors have been traveling around Iraq in as they've been thwarted in their attempt to find out what weapons Saddam Hussein has. But it's also important to hold Saddam Hussein accountable to make certain he no longer violates the will of the United Nations. "


Simply said "yes"

 

[TurboJunky]

I'm still waiting to see the quote and cite where President Bush used the words "imminent threat" as some of our lefties claim. I can hear the keys clicking away right now trying to find it on the net.

 

[We4ster]

Top ten reasons for invading Iraq............


10. Sudan has requested Iraq’s spot on the "Axis of Evil."


9. **** Cheney wants Saddam’s decorating tips for his own “undisclosed location.”


8. The FBI says Iraq will soon launch a Scud missile at the Texas Air National Guard.


7. Oil Company profits are lower than CEO ethics.


6. Air Jordan says invading Iraq "is a slam dunk!"


5. **** Cheney’s implant defibrillator picked up Saddam calling Bush a dumber **** than his father.


4. Colin Powell is jealous that Saddam has more medals.


3. John Ashcroft has learned there is a nude marble statue of Saddam peeing into a downtown Baghdad fountain.


2. Daddy Bush carries around an old satellite photo of Saddam giving him the finger.

And drumroll, please --


1. Stopping weapons of Mass destruction will win over the Catholic vote in 2004.

 

[We4ster]

Why did Bush really attack Iraq?

Not that anyone needed convincing that spreading democracy, helping the Iraqi people, stopping human rights abuses, ending proliferation, or enforcing UN resolutions were not the real reasons for going into Iraq, but giving those as reasons just makes no logical sense after a little thought.

Let us assume for the sake of argument that those were, in fact, Bush's goals. So he's sitting in the Oval Office thinking, "Hmm... how do I end nuclear proliferation?" How does he come up with invading Iraq rather than focusing on securing Russia's loose nukes, engaging with North Korea, breaking up Pakistan's proliferation ring, or making sure Pakistan and India don't lob nukes at each other?

Likewise with spreading democracy, if he was looking for the places with the greatest potential to bring the most democracy the easiest, why did we pull resources away from Afghanistan? Even if there were other reasons for that, why not find a country that's already trying to be democratic and give it a little help rather than having to invade and start over from scratch? Whatever happened to trying to get the greatest gain from the least effort?

And ending human rights abuses, if he wanted to stop human rights abuses from occurring in the future (what's done can't be undone, after all), why not work on PREVENTING armed conflict and putting pressure on the human rights abusers we have ties to? Besides, was Iraq really the country most likely to do massive human rights violations in the future?

Stopping terrorism, if he wanted to stop terrorism, why on earth did we pull resources off the hunt for Al Quaeda, invade an Islamic nation (if that didn't fuel Al Quaeda's recruitment, nothing will), kick out one of Osama's enemies, overstretch our troops, and poison our relations with our allies?

Finally, enforcing UN resolutions, first, does anyone on either side actually believe this was a real reason, that the Bush administration up and decided that the UN's resolutions should be enforced for their own merit, and looked around to play global cop on countries who were in violation? If anyone actually does believe that, please consider that the US is in violation of UN resolutions.

I should also add one reason that has cropped up, that we went into Iraq because Saddam Hussein was a bad guy/evil. Hello? Is anyone home? Does anyone want to list all the bad guys in the world? Is Bush seriously suggesting that we should invade all their countries? That argument, looked at as a reason, not a tacked on justification after the fact, is ludicrous. I haven't even gotten into defining what a "bad guy" is. Just about every prominent person has at least a few people who think they're the anti-Christ. If the definition is anyone Bush doesn't like, man are the Germans in trouble.

If the above criteria are so important to Bush, why are we friends with Pakistan? Let's see, it has an authoritarian regime, has WMD, and just pardoned a major nuclear proliferator. I'm not sure about human rights abuses, and violating UN resolutions but I wouldn't be surprised to find some instances of those. As far as being a threat to stability and peace in the region, Pakistan's involvement with Kashmir is a lot more threatening than Saddam was when we went in. The Indians will tell you Pakistan is actively sponsoring terrorism, too. If the grounds we were given for going into Iraq are what the administration is really basing its actions on, shouldn't we at least be giving Pakistan a lot of nasty looks?

 

[bishir]

The whole point of this tread is ridiculous. Name me a politician that has never lied.

 

[TurboJunky]

Originally posted by bishir
The whole point of this tread is ridiculous. Name me a politician that has never lied.

Absolutely true. However, one loses ALL creidibility when they place one hand on the bible, the other raised in the air and swears to tell "the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help me God". Then proceed to break that solemn oath by LYING (Clinton). That's called COMMITTING A CRIME.

 

[We4ster]

And when they look back at GW and see that he has repeatedly lied and caused 1000's of innocent people to die, I wonder what they will say?


"How can you impeach a president that doesnt know the meaning of the word.....Doh"

 

[SinistrV6]

Absolutely no WMD EVER!!

I'm sure all these folks actually died of natural causes! Wake up and smell the nerve gas!

From 1977 to 1987, between 4,500 and 5,000 Kurdish villages in northern Iraq were destroyed and the population placed in "resettlement camps." As many as 50,000 Kurds died. In the spring of 1987, thousands of Kurds were killed by chemical and conventional bombs. In at least 40 cases, Gen. Ali Hasan al-Majid, "Chemical Ali," used chemical weapons to kill or chase Kurds from villages. In 1988, as many as 5,000 Kurds were killed and 10,000 injured in Halabja. During the Anfal campaign, from February to September 1988, Iraqi soldiers rounded up more than 100,000 Kurds, mostly men and boys, and executed them. More than 1-million Kurds fled and tens of thousands were killed or imprisoned when Iraq crushed an uprising after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Kurdish officials say that around 200,000 have been forcibly evicted from areas that were under Hussein's control.

1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War
As early as 1983, Iraq used poison gas against Iranian troops. In 1988, Hussein reportedly used chemical weapons in a lightning attack to retake the vital Faw Peninsula. An estimated 20,000 Iranians were killed by Iraqi mustard gas or by the nerve agents tabun and sarin during the war.


Let's leave Iraq now so they can get back to planning similar chemical attacks on us! How dare we interfere in their plans?! We should sit on our hands until they wipe out a major US city. Then, when the U.N. gives us permission to retaliate (and not one second before) we can issue a very strongly worded "Letter of Displeasure" and they'll leave us alone! Mean 'ole terrorist guys! I'm sure they're reasonable people, just like us. You just have to take the time to get to know them.

 

[1QWIK6]

From 1977 to 1987, between 4,500 and 5,000 Kurdish villages in northern Iraq were destroyed and the population placed in "resettlement camps." As many as 50,000 Kurds died. In the spring of 1987, thousands of Kurds were killed by chemical and conventional bombs. In at least 40 cases, Gen. Ali Hasan al-Majid, "Chemical Ali," used chemical weapons to kill or chase Kurds from villages. In 1988, as many as 5,000 Kurds were killed and 10,000 injured in Halabja. During the Anfal campaign, from February to September 1988, Iraqi soldiers rounded up more than 100,000 Kurds, mostly men and boys, and executed them. More than 1-million Kurds fled and tens of thousands were killed or imprisoned when Iraq crushed an uprising after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Kurdish officials say that around 200,000 have been forcibly evicted from areas that were under Hussein's control.

1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War
As early as 1983, Iraq used poison gas against Iranian troops. In 1988, Hussein reportedly used chemical weapons in a lightning attack to retake the vital Faw Peninsula. An estimated 20,000 Iranians were killed by Iraqi mustard gas or by the nerve agents tabun and sarin during the war.

Blah, blah, blah... please tell me... what does all this have to do about G.W.Bush lying about an IMMINIENT THREAT OF WMD FROM IRAQ? Remember he was sooo sure they were there..

Let's leave Iraq now so they can get back to planning similar chemical attacks on us! How dare we interfere in their plans?! We should sit on our hands until they wipe out a major US city. Then, when the U.N. gives us permission to retaliate (and not one second before) we can issue a very strongly worded "Letter of Displeasure" and they'll leave us alone! Mean 'ole terrorist guys! I'm sure they're reasonable people, just like us. You just have to take the time to get to know them.

IRAQ had plans to attack the US? Where, please tell me. Oh wait... you made it up. Sigh...

 

[TurboJunky]

Originally posted by 1QWIK6
Blah, blah, blah... please tell me... what does all this have to do about G.W.Bush lying about an IMMINIENT THREAT OF WMD FROM IRAQ?

Please post the EXACT QUOTE of GWB saying that and cite your sources.

 

[denn454]

i didn't have time to read all the posts so i'm sorry if i say what anyone else has said.

didn't we get the biggest weapon of mass destruction in that country? i think hes locked up somewhere right now hopefully getting the sh.. beat out of him.

did YOU see the intelegence reports saying there are wmd in iraq? whos to say what they said. my guess is they really did think that iraq had wmd, and we do know they have motive to use them aginst their own people, us, or anyone else. That alone in my oppinion makes it a worth wile cause to see that iraq doesn't pose a threat.

i'l say something that i don't 100% agree with and i'm sure everyoen here wont' agree with either but in the big scope of things, think about it. I think its worth loosing a FEW f our guys to make sure that iraq doesnt' pose a threat rather than turning a blind eye to it and letting them nuke us and kill millions of inniocent people. Its a harsh thing to say but i think its true. getting sadam makes it, in my oppinion, worth our time.

I'd love to see no one over there dying for our country. no terrorists. no wmd in the wrong hands. a perfect world, but thats not the case.

It really comes down to do you think the ends justify the means.

and one other little thing, if we impeached every president who has ever lyed to the public we wouldnt' have many presidents would we?

 

[TurboJunky]

Originally posted by denn454
And one other little thing, if we impeached every president who has ever lyed to the public we wouldnt' have many presidents would we?

Good post.

As far as impeachment, the left is just full of sour grapes because their guy got pinched for committing a crime while in office. At least GWB was a young college kid when he was hit for DUI. What's Slick Willy's excuse other than wanting a hummer from a sow?

 

[SinistrV6]

Originally posted by 1QWIK6
[B

IRAQ had plans to attack the US? Where, please tell me. Oh wait... you made it up. Sigh...



[/B]

You're right, 1QWIK6. I made it up. I haven't seen a report saying they're planning to attack us. Unlike you (but just like our President), I have no desire to sit here and wait until it's too late to act upon it. The WMD's (biological at the very least) did/do exist. It's called a pre-emptive strike. Better to strike now and be safe than sit and cry over a million dead Americans in New York, Los Angeles, Boston......

Americans by and large have become a bunch of sissies. All this "hand wringing" over what the President's done to PROTECT YOUR SORRY AZZ makes me sick! You're at the top of the human heap! Deal with it.

If the President played "fast and loose" with the facts to get the funding and congressional approval to move into Iraq, I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT! Keep in mind that "Joe Citizen" isn't privvy to every detail of every move that our elected officials make (especially the Commander-in-Chief). I am confident that he moved with the best interests of AMERICANS in mind! AMERICANS! That means Democrats and Republicans, rich and poor, young and old, Ford, Chevy and Buick .

Stop hunting for problems with a guy who's working his butt off to save yours! And get used to saying "President Bush" for the next four years! The democrats had a real shot at the office if they could've come up with an "electable" candidate, but they blew it with their choice.

 

[STAGE 2]

Originally posted by 1QWIK6
STAGE2... STILL KING OF SPIN

Geeezz.. get a room with yourself...

I swear. If this wasn't providing so much entertainment for me I might actually be worried about the state of our citizenry.


Before I begin 1QWIK6, I was wondering how old are you and what do you do for a living. No other reason than my own personal curiosity. Anywho, I've got 3 main points to make, which I am fairly certian will, for the hundredth time nail the coffin on this dead horse.

1. The most important. If you look at the Constitution (which I highly doubt that you have judging by some of your posts) you will see that to be impeached, you must have comitted 1) treason 2) bribery or 3) other high crimes and misdemeanors. I hate to break it to you my friend, but nothing Bush did, even if he did lie to the American people, qualifies as a violation of any of these.

2. The dumbest thing about arguing with you people is that you have a hidden agenda which you will never admit to. You would raise cain if Bush tied his shoelace, and be equally enraged if he didnt. Nothing this president could do would satisfy you, which brings us back to my point from my previous post. There is nothing that Bush could have said that which would have convinced you that this war was just, so sitting here and complaining about the supposed lack of WMD's is just a sham argument to cover your true reason for opposing the war... specifically that you hate Bush. All of the "ostrich" contingent (which includes you) said nothing when prior administrations went to war in the Balkans and other parts of the world citing reasons and justifications that don't even begin to compare to the amount of evidence that suggested that this war needed to happen.

Now that there is a president in power that you cant stand, apparently the rules change. Whereas before it was acceptable to go to war to "protect innocent lives" and "stop injustice", now you and your shortsighted group of liberals demand a standard for war that is impossible to meet. Short of catching saddam launching his weapons (which would either be too late, or require force to access places which were not allowed to be searched i.e. start a conflict) you will not be satisfied. Hate Bush all you want, but be honest about it and dont hide behind some flimsy argument you dont really believe.

3. And on a more personal note I do have to thank you for playing the part of the perfect liberal. Ladies and gentlemen please listen closely cause this is how a textbook liberal operates.

A. you make some statement not founded in fact - i.e. Bush should be impeached

B. someone (me) counters you with fact

C. you decide to avoid the issues cause things are starting to fall apart and you call into question my intellect and education - I "are" from public schools

D. I explain that I "are" not from public schools and am very well qualified to discuss these issues

E. you tell me to get a room with myself - very articulate

You see, you were the one who decided to vere from the facts, and you were the one who decided to call into question my intelligence. Debate a la Pee Wee Herman might work on a 10 year old, but it falls way short in the realm of serious discussions.

Remember, in the battle of wits, dont be the one who brings a knife to the gun fight.

 

[We4ster]

The truth about bush will come out...its just a matter of time.

WMD's....

Are we going to attack every country we "think" has WMD's?
If we do, we will be at war for the next century. The draft will have to be reinstituted, taxes will go through the ceiling and 10's of thousands if not millions of people will die. Bush is on a religious crusade and may god forgive him.
This is a world issue and the worlds needs to be involved, wake up fools!

Rant Rant Rant

 

[SinistrV6]

Originally posted by We4ster
The draft will have to be reinstituted...

^^^^Excellent idea regardless of world situation!^^^^

This is a world issue and the worlds needs to be involved, [/QUOTE]

I agree. Unfortuately, the "world" is represented by the United Nations. The U.N. is an absolute waste of space and unwilling and unable to get ANYTHING done. Did I mention.......

"GET US OUT OF THE U.N.!"

 

[The Radius Kid]

Originally posted by 1QWIK6
From 1977 to 1987, between 4,500 and 5,000 Kurdish villages in northern Iraq were destroyed and the population placed in "resettlement camps." As many as 50,000 Kurds died. In the spring of 1987, thousands of Kurds were killed by chemical and conventional bombs. In at least 40 cases, Gen. Ali Hasan al-Majid, "Chemical Ali," used chemical weapons to kill or chase Kurds from villages. In 1988, as many as 5,000 Kurds were killed and 10,000 injured in Halabja. During the Anfal campaign, from February to September 1988, Iraqi soldiers rounded up more than 100,000 Kurds, mostly men and boys, and executed them. More than 1-million Kurds fled and tens of thousands were killed or imprisoned when Iraq crushed an uprising after the 1991 Persian Gulf War. Kurdish officials say that around 200,000 have been forcibly evicted from areas that were under Hussein's control.

1980-1988 Iran-Iraq War
As early as 1983, Iraq used poison gas against Iranian troops. In 1988, Hussein reportedly used chemical weapons in a lightning attack to retake the vital Faw Peninsula. An estimated 20,000 Iranians were killed by Iraqi mustard gas or by the nerve agents tabun and sarin during the war.

Blah, blah, blah... please tell me... what does all this have to do about G.W.Bush lying about an IMMINIENT THREAT OF WMD FROM IRAQ? Remember he was sooo sure they were there..

Let's leave Iraq now so they can get back to planning similar chemical attacks on us! How dare we interfere in their plans?! We should sit on our hands until they wipe out a major US city. Then, when the U.N. gives us permission to retaliate (and not one second before) we can issue a very strongly worded "Letter of Displeasure" and they'll leave us alone! Mean 'ole terrorist guys! I'm sure they're reasonable people, just like us. You just have to take the time to get to know them.

IRAQ had plans to attack the US? Where, please tell me. Oh wait... you made it up. Sigh...

Now there's a guy who knows his stuff.
That's part of what I was alluding to.
He had and used them in the past.
Now what happened to what he had left?
Anybody watch 60 minutes on an regular basis?

 

[TurboTer]

Originally posted by We4ster
And when they look back at GW and see that he has repeatedly lied and caused 1000's of innocent people to die, I wonder what they will say?


"How can you impeach a president that doesnt know the meaning of the word.....Doh"

There are no innocent Iraqis. We should level the entire place and wipe them out. All of them. One American is more important than 10,000 Iraqis.

 

[FAMLYKAR]

W-Gate

Remember John Dean? REPUBLICAN counsel to President Nixon who ratted him out?

He's Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack.........

He states that the Bush conspiracy is far more criminal than the Watergate conspiracy. No one died and no countries were destroyed during Watergate.

He makes the case that Bush knowingly lied to us and got us into a war that we did not need to fight at that time. Conspiracy.

I believe we need to finish rebuilding what we destroyed in Afghanistan first, before attacking another country. Maybe then the rest of the world might start to trust our motives.

I am shocked at how fast this country has gone from a Representative Republic to the Bush fundamentalist Christian Theocracy. Bush has created a religious war against the fundamentalist Muslim Theocracies. Both suck.

I thought we all came over to America to escape these Religious wars where the faithful will blindly kill in the name of the Lord. These killings never end. (Can you say Israel vs the Middle East.)

(Oh yeh, the American "boat people" from Europe also came to this land to teach the Native American "Heathens" the value of Capitalism and convert them to good Christian's too. Can you say casino?)

We say Crusade, they say Jihaad. I say moving to Canada or Europe is making more sense every day.

 

[SinistrV6]

Re: W-Gate

Originally posted by FAMLYKAR
I say moving to Canada or Europe is making more sense every day.

I'm sure we can scrape together enough for your ticket and anyone else who doesn't appreciate the freedoms we enjoy here or the sacrifices made and being made to preserve them.

Goodbye and good riddance to you and your ilk. And be sure to say hello the spineless weenies in France and Spain if you make it over that way. Just don't ever try to come back!

When did this great country go from being the "Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave" to the "Land of the Candyasses and the Home of the Offended"?