OT Texas Republicans
 

"Don White" wrote in message
...

NOYB wrote in message
ink.net...


Don't worry Harry...we'll find the WMD's. Bush's comment about mustard
gas
recently found at a turkey farm in Libya should be proof that he hasn't
given up the search. Every intelligence agency in the Western world knew
Saddam had 'em. There were numerous reports before the war by Israeli
intelligence (and others) that large convoys were leaving Iraq and
heading
to Syria. Although they haven't talked about it very much publicly, the
Administration believes that Syria is hiding the WMD's. Just watch.


Possible, but you would thing Israel would be very nervous of Syria having
all those WMD and strike first.



...........ZOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMMMMMMMMM.....

Did you here that Don? It flew right over your head.

OT Texas Republicans
 

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 18:43:21 -0400, "jim--" wrote:

And the liberal media was pretty tough on
the guy...he did stumble at times but ended up answering every question.

I must have missed his answer about his biggest mistake. What did he
finally come up with?

I have to say, on a personal basis, I felt sorry for Bush up there.
The guy was clearly out of his league. The unfortunate truth is this
is the guy supposedly leading our country and he's made a royal mess
out of everything he's touched, with the notable exception being tax
breaks for the wealthy.

bb.

OT Texas Republicans
 

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:%sffc.144028$JO3.84998@attbi_s04...

You may not agree with Bush's decision to a preemptive strike, but no one
can seriously believe he lied. It might make for a great campaign sound
bite, but any rational person would know that is nothing more than
politics
to say Bush lied, since he was using the exact same intelligence that
Clinton used when he stated Iraq had WMD.


Here's the thing:

A) Clinton didn't use that information to invade Iraq, Bush did.

B) Just because there "were" weapons in Iraq in 1991 and maybe in the
late 1990's does not mean there were any weapons there in 2002 or 2003.

Just last night Bush said something like, "We know Saddam had those weapons,
we know because he used them on his own people." True enough. But that was
HOW many years ago? 10? Does that mean he still has them? Does that
mean that the best way to get them (if they are there at all) is to send our
troops in to invade?

OT Texas Republicans
 

"NOYB" wrote in message
ink.net...

You sure about that? There's no way every intelligence agency in the
Western World was wrong about their existance.


Galileo and I had a good laugh over this...

OT Texas Republicans
 

On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 23:16:03 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:


Possible, but you would thing Israel would be very nervous of Syria having
all those WMD and strike first.


'cept that they don't exist. But, you gotta keep up the cover up.

bb

OT Texas Republicans
 

Did Bill Clinton lie when he stated Iraq had WMD?


"Harry Krause" wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:

If Bush lied about WMD's, then so did all presidents going back to the
late
80's and the majority of congressman, senators and the United Nations
since
the First Gulf War.

You may not agree with Bush's decision to a preemptive strike, but no
one
can seriously believe he lied. It might make for a great campaign sound
bite, but any rational person would know that is nothing more than
politics
to say Bush lied, since he was using the exact same intelligence that
Clinton used when he stated Iraq had WMD.


Of course he lied. There were all sorts of reports available to Bush
that indicated there were no WMD in Iraq. Bush and his fellow
Bush-****ters made a conscious decision to ignore intel that didn't play
into their rationale, and then went on to deceive the American public
about it.

The chickens are coming home to roost for Bush now. With any luck, the
American voters will toss the ignorant, incompetent, lying son of a
bitch out this fall.

OT Texas Republicans
 

"thunder" wrote in message

LOL, then he was clearly wrong, as there are no WMD.

Let's stick to facts. What is known is that there were NBC weapons in Iraq.
These facts are documented, and are incontrovertible.

What is not known is where these weapons are now. Strong indications are
that the bulk of the arsenal is in Syria. An expatriate Syrian journalist
documented same in an article in one of the European newspapers (name
escapes me) some months ago. Recent reports suggest ongoing shipments of
unaccompanied, unprotected NBC material from Syria to Sudan aboard civil
airliners.

Had we acted in 10/02 instead of tap dancing around the UN, the point would
likely be moot.

OT Texas Republicans
 

"thunder" wrote in message

....There is
a major difference in having a belief, and acting on that belief.

Yes -- that difference is called "courage".


Before one puts lives at risk, it is prudent to be sure.

In a shooting war, one often does not have the luxury of being sure. You go
with the best intelligence available, and calculate risk. No one ever won a
war with a good defensive posture; a battle, perhaps, from time to time,
but not the war.

OT Texas Republicans
 

Poor (FAS)kisser, never had a chance.
Fried before birth.

OT Texas Republicans
 

John Gaquin wrote:
"thunder" wrote in message

....There is
a major difference in having a belief, and acting on that belief.


Yes -- that difference is called "courage".

Not in Bush's case. In his case, it was pigheadedness, stupidity, and
politics.