Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

* took responsibility for NOTHING.

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
PurpleChez Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 06:57 AM
Original message
* took responsibility for NOTHING.
Much has been made about how * took responsibility yesterday for going to war based on faulty intelligence. But even a cursory reading of his statement shows that he really took responsibility for nothing. He admitted that intel was faulty -- which, at this point, is like admitting that water is wet. He then insisted that it was still right for him to have invaded Iraq because, of course, Hussein was a Bad Man. And a Threat to the U.S. And so on. So * is still as much as ever locked in a psychotic state of denial -- in his mind he had made no mistakes, the war is glorious, and the world is now a safer place, thanks to him.

This psychopath and his cronies are a cancer on the white house and on the nation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Oversea Visitor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 06:58 AM
Response to Original message
1. If you follow recents news
He working towards Iran now.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Conservativesux Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 07:02 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. A war on Iran too? From the frying pan straight into the fire, Americans!
Just when you think it cant get any worse with this chickenhawk numbskull and his rich, corrupt cronies.

May they all rot in hell for what they have done!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oversea Visitor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 07:07 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. What is scary is this
1) Noone trying to stop him
2) He can declare intelligence faulty but still thinks attack Iraq is correct cause they are a threat.
3) Now he saying Iran a real threat
4) Intelligence say need Regime change in Iran
5) Iran nuclear programme a threat.

War can easily start
Just a strike on Iran so call nuclear site.
Iran will declare war on US
Thats all to it
US officially at war.
Better look up the rules on how much power a president has in times of war.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 07:20 AM
Response to Original message
4. The Intel Was Faulty Because They Chose To Interpret It The.....
way it fit their purpose. He says that he will fix the intelligence now. No need to fix it because it wasn't broke in the first place. They just didn't listen to the Intel folks and made their own interpretations. He will now take credit for fixing a broken intelligence network and claim a win for that as well. How sinister and convoluted.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oversea Visitor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. Yup
All know he is lying but yet do nothing.
This asking for some really serious trouble.
All wrong signals being send to him.
Make him think he is untouchable.
Make him think if he wants to attack Iran he can.
DANGER DANGER
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
global1 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 07:31 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Yes - * Is Now Setting The Tone And Preparing Us For The Real .......
confrontation. Stay tuned for part deux.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oversea Visitor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 07:36 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. After one whole months of beating the drum on Iran
I get very worried.
It is like drumming into everyone brain to accept the inevitable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wake.up.america Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 07:45 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. Look for the IDF to unload on Iran in the form of air attacks.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oversea Visitor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 07:51 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Isreal can do very little against Iran
Yup Isreal has nuke but its not going to do any good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
C_U_L8R Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 08:29 AM
Response to Original message
10. Hollow words
without Deeds.

If Bush wants to take responsibility then
he needs to resign and surrender himself
to a war crimes tribunal in the Hague.

It's that simple,
Without taking the ACTION of responsibility... it's just BS.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Windy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 08:46 AM
Response to Original message
11. He said even with the faulty intelligence...knowing what he knows
now...he would still have attacked Iraq! That is just proof positive that the WMD line was just an excuse to sucker the American people. His goal was regime change all along..which all of us who monitor the plotting and planning of the PNAC knew all along!!

He sent young american men and women to die for he and his cohort's warped political ideology.

He should be drawn and quartered!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewWaveChick1981 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 09:12 AM
Response to Original message
12. That's what I told my husband last night.
* is using smoke and mirrors to make it appear he accepted responsibility. "Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Thorandmjolnir Donating Member (390 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-15-05 09:22 AM
Response to Original message
13. So do I understand this correctly
Is Bush saying that since:

1. Iraq had no WMD
2. No ties to Al-Quida
3. No threat to its neighbors or the US
4. Not in violation of the UN resolutions

He would still have invaded?


And exactly what would be the justification, since regime change is a war crime under International and US law?

If the Democratic Party cannot seize on this humongous opening, there is no hope for them to ever win the argument over the Iraq war.

Remember, the whole exercise before the war was to make it legitimate, to come up with reasons other than regime change.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 05:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC