Why isn't BUSH impeached?

[GNandGS]

It was our government's position to remove SH before Bush took office.

It was the 17th resolution(?), of which I think 4 were during the Bush term that finally got us where we are.

"Bush lied". As already suggested, just admit that if you can use that in a sentence then you simply dont like Bush with or without a reason. Adding "Impeach" to that sentence just makes you look bad.

Resolution 1441 gave Iraq one last chance, one last chance to come into compliance or to face serious consequences. No Council member present and voting on that day had any illusions about the nature and intent of the resolution or what serious consequences meant if Iraq did not comply. Somehow they missed that for nearly a decade.

Oh, did Clinton get permission to bomb Iraq in 98? Did he even offer reasons for why? Do you know them.

All this is directly related to cease fire crap from the early 90s!!! Now get this...

The UN scandalizes the Oil4Food program, doesnt enforce any of their MANY resolutions over MANY years, chooses to do NOTHING of value when we get shot at (HOW MANY PLANES SHOT DOWN?), has members on the take apparently, YET:

It takes the "new" threat of WMD's to get them to authorize force? The same WMD's that were mentioned in all those other resolutions BEFORE Bush took office? I say thats a testement to Bush if he can get them to do what they say they will, yet dont, when others could not.

We didnt go to Iraq just for WMD's, we did it for violations of the agreements they broke; the shooting down of our planes, the building of weapons they shouldnt have... and yes, WMD's. ALL related to the "rules" they set forth nearly a decade before Bush.

Buy a vowel!

 

[We4ster]

READ MY LIPS: WE VIOLATED THE U.N. RESOLUTION BY INVADING IRAQ....

Lying to the public to gain support for his invasion of IRAQ!
I honestly believed he KNOWINGLY LIED!

BUSHBABY "Wont be impeached " REPEAT REPEAT REPEAT!
Republican Congress..........................

I would vote Rep if Powell was running......Bush/Cheney...no way!

IVE ASKED THIS BEFORE>>>>GIVE "ONE" LEGITIMATE REASON FOR INVADING IRAQ

 

[GNandGS]

He wont be impeached because there are no grounds. Not only do you not know what you are talking about but Im sure you are about due for a "southern" joke soon.

I'll take your UN violation... and say "so what?" Your QUESTION was for ONE legit reason...

I gave the reason. Cease fire agreements were broken... even an idiot knows the opposite of cease fire.

As far as UN violation, just how were they going to enforce the 9th, 10th... 17th resolution? Write another? lol

Give one legit reason why I should listen to you anymore.... nevermind I wont read it.

 

[TurboJunky]

Selective Hearing

GNandGS,

I suggest you avail yourself to the board's features. Specifically, the IGNORE feature. It's suited to those with selective hearing and understanding of the facts. It's pointless to continuously point to FACT after FACT, stick it in their face and see them deny, deny and deny. It's Clintonesque. These clowns have closed their eyes and ears to anything contrary to their agendas. I on the other hand am willing to be swayed by FACTS and not emotions. I challenged ANYONE to post a direct quote from President Bush with him using "imminent threat" in any of his speeches. I would change my mind on the topic if anyone could since they repeatedly said GWB stated those very words. So far nothing but crickets chirping.

You could point to dozens of legitimate and legal reasons that allowed us to resume hostilities with Saddam Hussien (as I have) and you're called a liar, just as they call Bush a liar.

They can't comprehend the legal requirements for impeachment "treason or high crimes AND misdemeanors".

They don't understand the english language or have never picked up an encyclopedia.

So, use the IGNORE feature because debating with a tape recorder is useless.

Here's what you'll see:

We4ster This person is on your Ignore List.

Enjoy....

 

[We4ster]

"Cease fire agreements were broken... "

They were part of the U.N. resolution...The U.N. didnt agree with our invasion...We did it on our own thereby VIOLATING THE U.N. RESOLUTION.........

We acted on our own under FALSE PRETENSES!

Spew more rhetoric!


TT/A1233


I'm not going to respond to you because you dont agree with me... Boo Hoo.......................Grow up!

 

[We4ster]

Something to think about?

"If Iraq was "not" an IMMINENT threat

why did bushbabys cabinet say it was
why did we attack if they WERENT an imminent threat


Makes you think.............hmmmmmmmmmmm

 

[TurboJunky]

GNandGS,

The IGNORE feature is especially suited for those who are unable to debate using geometric logic, unable to debate without insults, inability to have an open mind and admit when they're incorrect or unable to be swayed by facts.

 

[We4ster]

Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

 

[STAGE 2]

Gentlemen,

I was beginning to wonder why facts and logic were failing us but after reading We4ster's last couple of posts I suddenly realized the problem.

He, along with his cohorts have a greater concern for red tape, global perception, and UN dicta than the well being of America. We cant sway somebody who is not logical with logic. He simply has his priorities elsewhere. Sad for an American, abhorrent for a serviceman, virtually unthinkable for someone who claims to be a SEAL.

 

[We4ster]

Because I dont support a unjust war, I'm not patriotic
Because I dare to speak my mind, I'm not a good american
Because I believe the administration LIED, I'm a Democrat
Because I dont want american soldiers to die, I'm a traitor

You are blinded by your rhetoric and ignorance, you are fools

"When citizens stop questioning the government, they are doomed, question your government...hold them responsible"

 

[TurboJunky]

Originally posted by STAGE 2
Gentlemen,

I was beginning to wonder why facts and logic were failing us but after reading We4ster's last couple of posts I suddenly realized the problem.

He, along with his cohorts have a greater concern for red tape, global perception, and UN dicta than the well being of America. We cant sway somebody who is not logical with logic. He simply has his priorities elsewhere. Sad for an American, abhorrent for a serviceman, virtually unthinkable for someone who claims to be a SEAL.

Bingo!

And "The Most Ridiculous Item of the Day":

We4ster

 

[The Pro]

Originally posted by 1QWIK6
Red,


Hmmm.. only partly true. When a President (who has the MOST information than anyone) tells the NATION ON NATIONAL T.V. that Iraq has WMD and is an IMMANENT THREAT... it tends sway people. It did for me. I thought "Holy Crap! Immanent threat?!" Lets Invade!" But now... Hmmm seems like we were lied to.

KEEP THE SPINS COMING! THIS IS FUN!

1. It's "imminent"
2. He didn't say "they have WMD". He said they have the materials to make them, and the potential and willingness to use them (think the Kurds up north agree with that one??)
3. The President is compartmentalized. He in fact *does not* have the most information. Learn your facts before you start spouting off rumor and supposition as truth. The Senate Armed Services Committee, Intelligence committees from both sides, foreign service groups, etc, ALL have the same information as the president. There are cases where the PDB or other data makes it to the president *first*, but most of this is disclosed straight away via secure channels. One of those is not CNN, so *you* aren't made aware (which I guess is your problem after all).

It gets a little old when some talks about Bush this and Bush that when the fact of the matter IS that we responded. We responded with arms instead of just words (remember Somalia? When your boy Cliton [deliberately misspelled] pulled or forces out after that whole fiasco took place?). These people don't like us. It isn't relevant to them that you are conservative, liberal, democrat, republican, straight, queer, or whatever.. They don't care. You can't reason with them. They don't want to be your friend, and they won't listen to your bull$hit. They (the terrorists and fundamentalists) gleefully appluad when people die, regardless of context, and will pee on your grave if you die in front of them. These people don't understand spineless commentary from someone that doesn't have the GRAPES to stand up to them; the only thing they grasp clearly and quickly is a few thousand of their buddies laying in heaps around them.

They are NOT stupid; they are sublimely clever. They will take advantage of the fact that idiots in the world seek to divide us internally.

I'd like to know what *you* would have done if *you* were in a position of leadership (rather than playing armchair QB) when all this bad stuff went down.

Did he lie? I don't think he did. Did he present all the facts to the American people? I think he told what he knew at the time. Can anyone rely solely on sigint and humint for the types of assumptions to be validated that we needed more info on? Nope, and THAT is the critical mistake that the uninformed make every day when they say stupid $hit like this.

 

[We4ster]

If all we really wanted to do was overthrow Hussein, we could have done it several times without invading. Under Bush sr, under slick willie, under bushbaby, we had opportunities to eliminate Hussein. WE DIDNT DO IT.
After Desert Storm, Iraq's army was beaten and weak...they were no longer a threat. Hussein was making noise and thats all it was. He was beaten!
Bush didnt have to invade Iraq, we could have taken hussein out at any time...We have the technology...UAV's and stealth
Israel has been fighting terrorists for years and they are smart enough to know that you cant invade, control and try to change
the moslem/arab people/countries. What they are doing now is much more effective..take out the leaders and then negotiate.
We need to be strong.............................Not stupid

This war isnt about WMD's, it isnt about Terrorism...its about changing the middle east.....and its a losing propostion. Like you said , THEY HATE US.

"They will take advantage of the fact that idiots in the world seek to divide us internally".

It isnt the idiots in the world dividing us......ITS OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM.....DEMS VS REPS...............WAKE UP!
We are dividing our country through party loyalty. Its not whats good for our country...........its whats going to get "us" re-elected!

Because I'm anti-bushbaby I'm a Dem....................BS

The world isnt dividing us.....They're laughing their as*'s off at us...

Keep the rhetoric going!

 

[b231v6]

Originally posted by We4ster
If all we really wanted to do was overthrow Hussein, we could have done it several times without invading. Under Bush sr, under slick willie, under bushbaby, we had opportunities to eliminate Hussein. WE DIDNT DO IT.
After Desert Storm, Iraq's army was beaten and weak...they were no longer a threat. Hussein was making noise and thats all it was. He was beaten!
Bush didnt have to invade Iraq, we could have taken hussein out at any time...We have the technology...UAV's and stealth
Israel has been fighting terrorists for years and they are smart enough to know that you cant invade, control and try to change
the moslem/arab people/countries. What they are doing now is much more effective..take out the leaders and then negotiate.
We need to be strong.............................Not stupid

This war isnt about WMD's, it isnt about Terrorism...its about changing the middle east.....and its a losing propostion. Like you said , THEY HATE US.

"They will take advantage of the fact that idiots in the world seek to divide us internally".

It isnt the idiots in the world dividing us......ITS OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM.....DEMS VS REPS...............WAKE UP!
We are dividing our country through party loyalty. Its not whats good for our country...........its whats going to get "us" re-elected!

Because I'm anti-bushbaby I'm a Dem....................BS

The world isnt dividing us.....They're laughing their as*'s off at us...

Keep the rhetoric going!

Do you think before you type ?????????????? Like this post.it's splitting people because so many of them don't know what their spouting. I grew out of having mittens with the shoulder string years ago. Maybe you should cut your strings?

 

[We4ster]

"Do you think before you type ?????????????? Like this post.it's splitting people because so many of them don't know what their spouting. I grew out of having mittens with the shoulder string years ago. Maybe you should cut your strings"

R U on drugs?...............................

 

[The Pro]

Originally posted by We4ster
If all we really wanted to do was overthrow Hussein, we could have done it several times without invading. Under Bush sr, under slick willie, under bushbaby, we had opportunities to eliminate Hussein. WE DIDNT DO IT.
After Desert Storm, Iraq's army was beaten and weak...they were no longer a threat. Hussein was making noise and thats all it was. He was beaten!
Bush didnt have to invade Iraq, we could have taken hussein out at any time...We have the technology...UAV's and stealth
Israel has been fighting terrorists for years and they are smart enough to know that you cant invade, control and try to change
the moslem/arab people/countries. What they are doing now is much more effective..take out the leaders and then negotiate.
We need to be strong.............................Not stupid

This war isnt about WMD's, it isnt about Terrorism...its about changing the middle east.....and its a losing propostion. Like you said , THEY HATE US.

"They will take advantage of the fact that idiots in the world seek to divide us internally".

It isnt the idiots in the world dividing us......ITS OUR POLITICAL SYSTEM.....DEMS VS REPS...............WAKE UP!
We are dividing our country through party loyalty. Its not whats good for our country...........its whats going to get "us" re-elected!

Because I'm anti-bushbaby I'm a Dem....................BS

The world isnt dividing us.....They're laughing their as*'s off at us...

Keep the rhetoric going!

Uh, wow. Let me try to get my 3rd grade mentality on so I can address some of your points...

1. I never mentioned particular portions of the body politic. Dem vs Rep is irrelevant.

2. We are not allowed to target heads of state for assassination, since 1977.

3. Bush Sr. knew that going "downtown" at the time was not feasable from a geo-political perspective. Since he had *much* greater insight into those sorts of things than any president (save perhaps Nixon) in recent history, I respect and understand that reasoning. That doesn't mean I didn't want to go downtown when *I* was there nearly 10 months in a row back then.

4. The difference between 1990-91 and now, besides the leadership, is that Bush Jr. *didn't care* about the way other countries perceived the regime change in Iraq. 1441 is pretty clear on what was happening, and what the corrective action might entail. The fact that the UN (an organization I wouldn't trust to cater my enemies wedding, much less resolve anything in the world) kept saying "now now Saddam, we really really mean it this time, shame on you, bad boy, please stop..." is neither here nor there. The Security Council said he was in violation of the resolution, they did *not* at the time state when any corrective action would be taken, only that it was authorized. I was THERE flying Hornets over the southern no-fly zone. Being "locked up" several times by enemy tactical radar and being fired upon was in *direct* violation of the cease fire, UN resolution, and International laws. Each time he did this, we'd blow his sand-kiddies into tiny pieces. Did we relish it? No. That's what you do when you want to go back home under your own power though. It's us or them, figure out what side you're on.

5. Lose the emotion, and try to get back in your own head. Ok, you're cramped for space I see that now, but follow me here anyway. We are in a generation that has not been in a major conflict. Vietnam was *not* a major conflict. Neither was Korea. Men fought and died sure, but WWI and WWII were *major* in both scope of effect, and scope of logistics. The generations that fought in those battles know perfectly well that talking about freedom and doing something about it are two different things. They also realize that sometimes doing the right thing is not always the popular thing. I walked into a room where Saddam's people had thrown small children against a WALL in Kuwait in 1991. Pieces of brain still stuck to the wall, blood all along it and down to the floor. Why? Because THAT is how he got his point across.

Would you be so smug if it were *your* children? He did this to his own people.. He did this to people that DARED disagree with him. You think there is any doubt that the world is a better place now that he is not in power? If you can't agree on even that basic premise, I will forego further attempts at imbuing you with logic.

 

[b231v6]

Originally posted by The Pro
Uh, wow. Let me try to get my 3rd grade mentality on so I can address some of your points...

1. I never mentioned particular portions of the body politic. Dem vs Rep is irrelevant.

2. We are not allowed to target heads of state for assassination, since 1977.

3. Bush Sr. knew that going "downtown" at the time was not feasable from a geo-political perspective. Since he had *much* greater insight into those sorts of things than any president (save perhaps Nixon) in recent history, I respect and understand that reasoning. That doesn't mean I didn't want to go downtown when *I* was there nearly 10 months in a row back then.

4. The difference between 1990-91 and now, besides the leadership, is that Bush Jr. *didn't care* about the way other countries perceived the regime change in Iraq. 1441 is pretty clear on what was happening, and what the corrective action might entail. The fact that the UN (an organization I wouldn't trust to cater my enemies wedding, much less resolve anything in the world) kept saying "now now Saddam, we really really mean it this time, shame on you, bad boy, please stop..." is neither here nor there. The Security Council said he was in violation of the resolution, they did *not* at the time state when any corrective action would be taken, only that it was authorized. I was THERE flying Hornets over the southern no-fly zone. Being "locked up" several times by enemy tactical radar and being fired upon was in *direct* violation of the cease fire, UN resolution, and International laws. Each time he did this, we'd blow his sand-kiddies into tiny pieces. Did we relish it? No. That's what you do when you want to go back home under your own power though. It's us or them, figure out what side you're on.

5. Lose the emotion, and try to get back in your own head. Ok, you're cramped for space I see that now, but follow me here anyway. We are in a generation that has not been in a major conflict. Vietnam was *not* a major conflict. Neither was Korea. Men fought and died sure, but WWI and WWII were *major* in both scope of effect, and scope of logistics. The generations that fought in those battles know perfectly well that talking about freedom and doing something about it are two different things. They also realize that sometimes doing the right thing is not always the popular thing. I walked into a room where Saddam's people had thrown small children against a WALL in Kuwait in 1991. Pieces of brain still stuck to the wall, blood all
along it and down to the floor. Why? Because THAT is how he got his point across.

Would you be so smug if it were *your* children? He did this to his own people.. He did this to people that DARED disagree with him. You think there is any doubt that the world is a better place now that he is not in power? If you can't agree on even that basic premise, I will forego further attempts at imbuing you with logic.

According to some people in this discussion,it was are fault they (the Iraqies)kept violating the sanctions. And they know that there are foolish Americans who are used ()LED AROUND BY A STRING LIKE A CHILD--WEBSTER)because of their stupity.

Thanks for this post.

 

[progress1vebmx]

http://www.freewebs.com/montess/fyourpostsm.gif

 

[TurboTer]

Originally posted by We4ster
"Do you think before you type ?????????????? Like this post.it's splitting people because so many of them don't know what their spouting. I grew out of having mittens with the shoulder string years ago. Maybe you should cut your strings"

R U on drugs?...............................

Why don't you trade in your Turbo Regal for a VW Beetle? It's more fitting for your views. And while you're at it, go back to where you came from.

 

[IRACEIT]

They were dancing in the streets...

I observed the Iraqi people dancing in the streets live on CNN (Fairly liberal), and Fox News (Fair and balanced) as they tore down Saddam's statue in the town square.

I observed the same celebrations live on CC (Fairly liberal) and Fox News (Fair and balanced) when our soldiers cornered Saddam's terrible boys and shot the ____(fill it in) _____ out of them. Afterwards Iraqi's were dying as a result of so many bullets shot in the air in jubilant celebration.

This regime caused one of the longest blood baths of the 20th century... the Iran/Iraq war that used World War 1 trench tactics mixed with a willingness to toss Scud missiles at each other's cities. They used 7, 8, and 9 year old boys to clear land mines by with promises of 72 virgins, and if they refused forcing them at gun point to walk hand in hand to blow themselves up for the cause.

If anyone is to be blamed for allowing terrorism to continue unabated it is clearly our nation's unwillingness to confront it earlier when we had the manpower and resources to do so. (We can argue the later point to some degree). When Iranian Hamas Terrorists tortured Marine Lt. Col Higgins and sent back the video tape to the White House in 1983 of their actions we should have invaded those idiots as a response... but instead we left Beirut with our hands in the air. We should have leveled it.

My concern is what Senator Lugar explained on MSNBC this morning about the unfair representation of the middle class of America bearing the burden of the military responsibility. We have some tough choices to make on this subject. Clearly this conflict named the "war on terrorism" is going to require a 25 year or longer committment. Why then should the middle class bear the sole burden of such a lengthy venture?

Perhaps we need to establish Marine Corp recruiting centers in Mexico border towns offering American citizenship for those willing to grunt out three years of service in our military? Perhaps that is what it will take to gain the numbers willing to risk their lives for such a lengthy cause?

Clearly an impact is going to be seen in the next couple years to our Reserve and Active Duty military components. At the moment retention isn't a concern or issue, however... once you have been sent to one of the numerous Hell holes (Iraq or Afghanistan)
with a six month break between the two in some these guys cases it becomes a risky venture of realizing you are playing more than a game of craps with your life.

I have had conversations with recent returnee's from Iraq and Afghanistan from our local Colorado Springs Army base - Fort Carson and these stories are chilling. The stories also showed the bravery and honor of these young men ever so willing to step forward when many of their generation refuse to do so. If you could have observed the desert camo boots worn on the young Sergeant I talked to at the local DMV it would have cut you to the spine. Those boots told me a story his tired eyes couldn't tell me.
I asked him what were his plans were now that he lived through his experience... his response "Become a physical education teacher." Clearly he had a college education and could easily become an officer after submitting OTS (Officer Training School) and I suggested this opportunity to him. He politely declined even though I insisted he would make much more money as an officer. "It isn't about the money... as you can see I chose a career that won't pay me much more than my enlisted pay." Then I looked down again at his torn, ripped, and what surely were once sand colored boots... "They owe you another pair."