PDA

View Full Version : Neocons Pounding The War Drums Yet Again



Cigar
03-31-2014, 10:25 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHsn7f-I5i8&feature=player_embedded

"Former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice says that American leaders need to resist the temptation to become weary of war, according to a report of her remarks at a fundraiser.

"I fully understand the sense of weariness," she told a GOP fundraiser Wednesday, according to reports. "I fully understand that we must think: 'Us, again?' I know that we've been through two wars. I know that we've been vigilant against terrorism. I know that it's hard. But leaders can't afford to get tired. Leaders can't afford to be weary.""

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/03/27/condoleezza-rice-u-s-cant-afford-to-be-war-weary/




I got an idea ... how about we start sending the families of the people who think we're not strong enough (first) :laugh:

Starting with the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice Families :grin:

Captain Obvious
03-31-2014, 10:26 AM
http://animals.timduru.org/dirlist/dog/AustralianWildDog-2Dingos-Mating1.jpg

Captain Obvious
03-31-2014, 10:27 AM
"Fail" is your middle name:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkS9y5t0tR0

Cigar
03-31-2014, 10:31 AM
When did she become President of The United States? :laugh:

Mister D
03-31-2014, 10:36 AM
Right around the time Rice and Rumsfeld did.

Now get back to work, boy. :grin:

Captain Obvious
03-31-2014, 10:37 AM
Right around the time Rice and Rumsfeld did.

Now get back to work, boy. :grin:

Hell, you hit that softball before I could tee it up.

:laugh:

Mister D
03-31-2014, 10:39 AM
Hell, you hit that softball before I could tee it up.

:laugh:

What an epic fail. :grin:

The Sage of Main Street
03-31-2014, 03:55 PM
Neo-Condi is just an Affirmative Action bimbo appointed into a position way over her head because she would Uncle Tom Dumbo Dubya. She knew nothing special about the world, except detailed but narrow-minded, conformist, and unperceptive talking points about the Soviet Union. Assigned to re-start the Cold War, she dismissed Islamic terrorism as insignificant and probably provoked by Israel. After what should have been no surprise on 9/11, she openly stated that she had never heard of using a hijacked airplane as a suicide bomb, even though a responsible person in her position would have known that tactic was revealed on February 23, 1973 (28 years before 9/11!) when the Israelis discovered it and acted on it.

The Xl
03-31-2014, 03:58 PM
OPs point would hold some merit if he wasn't supporting a party that advocates for the same exact foreign policy.

bladimz
03-31-2014, 03:59 PM
http://animals.timduru.org/dirlist/dog/AustralianWildDog-2Dingos-Mating1.jpg

Was it good for you?

bladimz
03-31-2014, 04:09 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHsn7f-I5i8&feature=player_embedded

"Former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice says that American leaders need to resist the temptation to become weary of war, according to a report of her remarks at a fundraiser.

"I fully understand the sense of weariness," she told a GOP fundraiser Wednesday, according to reports. "I fully understand that we must think: 'Us, again?' I know that we've been through two wars. I know that we've been vigilant against terrorism. I know that it's hard. But leaders can't afford to get tired. Leaders can't afford to be weary.""

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/03/27/condoleezza-rice-u-s-cant-afford-to-be-war-weary/

I got an idea ... how about we start sending the families of the people who think we're not strong enough (first) :laugh:

Starting with the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice Families :grin:American military action in Syria and Ukraine? Why sure. I'm positive we can dig a bunch more kids from families all prepped to defend our freedom. What she said is so incredibly irresponsible and simple-minded... is she being tutored by Dick?

bladimz
03-31-2014, 04:13 PM
"Fail" is your middle name:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DkS9y5t0tR0Whoever believes that a Democratic Senator from NY has access to the same intel as the POTUS, raise your hands.

keymanjim
03-31-2014, 04:15 PM
Whoever believes that a Democratic Senator from NY has access to the same intel as the POTUS, raise your hands.
If you believe that congress was given different intel than the president then raise your hands.....up your butt and remove your head.

bladimz
03-31-2014, 04:29 PM
That's righties for you... there's always conditions.

nic34
03-31-2014, 04:36 PM
Good thing neo-condi isn't calling the shots today...

But just think, with the all republican state blad suggested you COULD do most ANYTHING!

bladimz
03-31-2014, 05:07 PM
Good thing neo-condi isn't calling the shots today...

But just think, with the all republican state blad suggested you COULD do most ANYTHING!It'd be a dream come true for weapons manufacturers and war profiteers.

http://www.writersbloq.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/tumblr_inline_mi1asv8LxH1reoukg.gif

The Xl
03-31-2014, 05:21 PM
Whoever believes that a Democratic Senator from NY has access to the same intel as the POTUS, raise your hands.

The current Pres is a democrat and a warmonger, so....

Peter1469
03-31-2014, 05:22 PM
We still have Americans that want to loan al Qaeda in Syria the US Air Force (along with Nav Air)?

Bob
03-31-2014, 05:26 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHsn7f-I5i8&feature=player_embedded

"Former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice says that American leaders need to resist the temptation to become weary of war, according to a report of her remarks at a fundraiser.

"I fully understand the sense of weariness," she told a GOP fundraiser Wednesday, according to reports. "I fully understand that we must think: 'Us, again?' I know that we've been through two wars. I know that we've been vigilant against terrorism. I know that it's hard. But leaders can't afford to get tired. Leaders can't afford to be weary.""

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/03/27/condoleezza-rice-u-s-cant-afford-to-be-war-weary/




I got an idea ... how about we start sending the families of the people who think we're not strong enough (first) :laugh:

Starting with the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice Families :grin:

That is not pounding drums. Besides, when do you plan to shut up that dumb fuck Obama who has magic markers drawing red lines in various countries. Now he is after Russia.

Bob
03-31-2014, 05:29 PM
OPs point would hold some merit if he wasn't supporting a party that advocates for the same exact foreign policy.

Why should democrats admit they monger most wars? They can't tell the truth.

nic34
03-31-2014, 05:33 PM
Why should democrats admit they monger most wars? They can't tell the truth.

Is that before or after Reagan?

Peter1469
03-31-2014, 05:43 PM
Is that before or after Reagan?

War wars do you blame Reagan for?

Mister D
03-31-2014, 05:45 PM
He had a few but he won the one that really counted. :wink:

Peter1469
03-31-2014, 05:46 PM
Well he invaded Grenada, and then left -- he didn't occupy it and try to turn it into a Jeffersonian Democracy. That is one.

Bob
03-31-2014, 05:58 PM
Is that before or after Reagan?

Care to show us the wars Reagan mongered?

Don't even try to pull that stunt. It does not work with his supporters.

I think I am among the few that was first against Reagan then for him.

I voted for his opponents for Governor but learned what a great man Reagan actually was then ardently voted for him.

Mister D
03-31-2014, 06:26 PM
Well he invaded Grenada, and then left -- he didn't occupy it and try to turn it into a Jeffersonian Democracy. That is one.

That Ortega guy too.

Peter1469
03-31-2014, 06:49 PM
That Ortega guy too.

No occupation. But that was under Bush the Elder.

zelmo1234
03-31-2014, 06:54 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fHsn7f-I5i8&feature=player_embedded

"Former secretary of state Condoleezza Rice says that American leaders need to resist the temptation to become weary of war, according to a report of her remarks at a fundraiser.

"I fully understand the sense of weariness," she told a GOP fundraiser Wednesday, according to reports. "I fully understand that we must think: 'Us, again?' I know that we've been through two wars. I know that we've been vigilant against terrorism. I know that it's hard. But leaders can't afford to get tired. Leaders can't afford to be weary.""

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2014/03/27/condoleezza-rice-u-s-cant-afford-to-be-war-weary/




I got an idea ... how about we start sending the families of the people who think we're not strong enough (first) :laugh:

Starting with the Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rice Families :grin:

Can you believe these Racists waging their War on women???????????? Unbelievable

zelmo1234
03-31-2014, 06:55 PM
When did she become President of The United States? :laugh:

So Condie" is President???? When did that happen???

Captain Obvious
03-31-2014, 06:57 PM
Was it good for you?

Dingo exactly how I planned...

zelmo1234
03-31-2014, 07:03 PM
Whoever believes that a Democratic Senator from NY has access to the same intel as the POTUS, raise your hands.

You fogot one that was on the armed services committee? But then you are a partisan hack so that would make sense

zelmo1234
03-31-2014, 07:05 PM
Good thing neo-condi isn't calling the shots today...

But just think, with the all republican state blad suggested you COULD do most ANYTHING!


Yes because the world has gotten sooooooo! much safer since King Obama has been in charge??? Remember when Putin and the rest of the world were openly making fun of Bush??? Oh! wait that was Obama, never mind

zelmo1234
03-31-2014, 07:07 PM
Is that before or after Reagan?

What war did Reagan get us in??? I forget?

Green Arrow
03-31-2014, 08:36 PM
Where was this concern when Obama got us into Libya and tried to get us into Syria?

Blackrook
03-31-2014, 11:49 PM
Neo-Condi is just an Affirmative Action bimbo appointed into a position way over her head because she would Uncle Tom Dumbo Dubya. She knew nothing special about the world, except detailed but narrow-minded, conformist, and unperceptive talking points about the Soviet Union. Assigned to re-start the Cold War, she dismissed Islamic terrorism as insignificant and probably provoked by Israel. After what should have been no surprise on 9/11, she openly stated that she had never heard of using a hijacked airplane as a suicide bomb, even though a responsible person in her position would have known that tactic was revealed on February 23, 1973 (28 years before 9/11!) when the Israelis discovered it and acted on it.OK, well that's blatantly racist to say Condi is affirmative action and an Uncle Tom. I mention this because you're a liberal, and liberals think it's ok to make racist attacks on black conservatives.

Green Arrow
03-31-2014, 11:58 PM
OK, well that's blatantly racist to say Condi is affirmative action and an Uncle Tom. I mention this because you're a liberal, and liberals think it's ok to make racist attacks on black conservatives.

Sage is not a liberal. He is his own...thing.

Blackrook
04-01-2014, 12:08 AM
Sage is not a liberal. He is his own...thing.
You're right. The Sage of Main Street is the village idiot of PF and neither side would want to claim him as their own.

The Sage of Main Street
04-01-2014, 11:13 AM
It'd be a dream come true for weapons manufacturers and war profiteers.

http://www.writersbloq.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/tumblr_inline_mi1asv8LxH1reoukg.gif

What so proudly we Halliburton.

The Sage of Main Street
04-01-2014, 11:32 AM
Sage is not a liberal. He is his own...thing.
I had to look that up to decode it: "A parasitic extraterrestrial lifeform...Should "The Thing" ever reach civilization, it would be only a matter of time before it consumes humanity." At least you didn't call me "The Blob"! Beware, Netwits, the poles are on the prowl!

bladimz
04-03-2014, 12:01 PM
You fogot one that was on the armed services committee? But then you are a partisan hack so that would make senseUm, she wasn't on that committee when the vote to go to war was taken. That vote was taken in 2002; she took her position on the committee in 2003.

Gnaw on that one for awhile. Facts are fun.

bladimz
04-03-2014, 12:03 PM
The current Pres is a democrat and a warmonger, so.......Point?

Green Arrow
04-03-2014, 12:07 PM
Um, she wasn't on that committee when the vote to go to war was taken. That vote was taken in 2002; she took her position on the committee in 2003.

Gnaw on that one for awhile. Facts are fun.

True, but she still voted in favor of the Iraq War.

bladimz
04-03-2014, 12:27 PM
True, but she still voted in favor of the Iraq War.I don't know if you were in on the discussion earlier but the point i was trying to make was that it's pretty well known that congressional members aren't privy to all intel made available to the POTUS. If Congress had known about the Downing Street Memo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo), at the very least, war would have most likely been avoided.

Green Arrow
04-03-2014, 12:28 PM
I don't know if you were in on the discussion earlier but the point i was trying to make was that it's pretty well known that congressional members aren't privy to all intel made available to the POTUS. If Congress had known about the Downing Street Memo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo), at the very least, war would have most likely been avoided.

Sure, if you assume Congress is honest and has no ulterior motives...and that would be an unwise assumption.

Bob
04-03-2014, 01:19 PM
I don't know if you were in on the discussion earlier but the point i was trying to make was that it's pretty well known that congressional members aren't privy to all intel made available to the POTUS. If Congress had known about the Downing Street Memo (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo), at the very least, war would have most likely been avoided.

First, do you understand the public law concerning Saddam Hussein created when Clinton signed it in 1998?

Saddam had a target placed on his back long before Bush came to office.

As to your so called proof, wikipedia says this. Both governments denied it was accurate.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo#p-search"] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo#mw-navigation)
The "Downing Street memo" (or the "Downing Street Minutes"), sometimes described by critics of the Iraq War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War) as the "smoking gun memo",[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo#cite_note-1) is the note of a secret 23 July 2002 meeting of senior British Labour (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)) government, defence and intelligence figures discussing the build-up to the war, which included direct reference to classified United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) policy of the time. The name refers to 10 Downing Street (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Downing_Street), the residence of the British prime minister (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom).
The memo recorded the head of the Secret Intelligence Service (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Intelligence_Service) (MI6) as expressing the view following his recent visit to Washington that "[George W.] Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush) wanted to remove Saddam Hussein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein), through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." It also quoted Foreign Secretary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_State_for_Foreign_and_Commonwealth_Af fairs) Jack Straw (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Straw) as saying that it was clear that Bush had "made up his mind" to take military action but that "the case was thin". Straw simultaneously noted that Iraq retained "WMD capability" and that "Saddam would continue to play hard-ball with the UN.". The military asked "what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one".
Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Goldsmith) also warned that justifying the invasion on legal grounds would be difficult. However, the meeting took place several months before the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1441), the resolution eventually used as the legal basis for the invasion of Iraq. UNR687 also provided a pre-existing basis, as it required Iraq to divest itself of "100%" of all WMD capacity, which the Memo agreed it had not.
A copy of the memo was obtained by British journalist Michael Smith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Smith_(newspaper_reporter)) and published in the The Sunday Times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sunday_Times_(UK)) in May 2005. Though its authenticity has never been seriously challenged, the British and American governments have stated that the contents do not accurately reflect their official policy positions at the time.

Bob
04-03-2014, 01:23 PM
http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/misc/quote_icon.png Originally Posted by bladimz http://thepoliticalforums.com/images/buttons/viewpost-right.png (http://thepoliticalforums.com/showthread.php?p=565551#post565551)
Um, she wasn't on that committee when the vote to go to war was taken. That vote was taken in 2002; she took her position on the committee in 2003.

Gnaw on that one for awhile. Facts are fun.


True, but she still voted in favor of the Iraq War.

Do they have amnesia or are they lying that Democrats had all facts and still voted to invade Iraq?

Democrats were behind the "get rid of Saddam" law signed into law by Clinton in 1998.

Democrats lie all the time in Congress.

bladimz
04-03-2014, 02:46 PM
First, do you understand the public law concerning Saddam Hussein created when Clinton signed it in 1998?

Saddam had a target placed on his back long before Bush came to office.

As to your so called proof, wikipedia says this. Both governments denied it was accurate.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


The "Downing Street memo" (or the "Downing Street Minutes"), sometimes described by critics of the Iraq War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_War) as the "smoking gun memo",[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo#cite_note-1) is the note of a secret 23 July 2002 meeting of senior British Labour (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)) government, defence and intelligence figures discussing the build-up to the war, which included direct reference to classified United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States) policy of the time. The name refers to 10 Downing Street (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/10_Downing_Street), the residence of the British prime minister (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Prime_Ministers_of_the_United_Kingdom).
The memo recorded the head of the Secret Intelligence Service (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_Intelligence_Service) (MI6) as expressing the view following his recent visit to Washington that "[George W.] Bush (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush) wanted to remove Saddam Hussein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saddam_Hussein), through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." It also quoted Foreign Secretary (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secretary_of_State_for_Foreign_and_Commonwealth_Af fairs) Jack Straw (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Straw) as saying that it was clear that Bush had "made up his mind" to take military action but that "the case was thin". Straw simultaneously noted that Iraq retained "WMD capability" and that "Saddam would continue to play hard-ball with the UN.". The military asked "what were the consequences, if Saddam used WMD on day one".
Attorney-General Lord Goldsmith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Goldsmith) also warned that justifying the invasion on legal grounds would be difficult. However, the meeting took place several months before the adoption of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Security_Council_Resolution_1441), the resolution eventually used as the legal basis for the invasion of Iraq. UNR687 also provided a pre-existing basis, as it required Iraq to divest itself of "100%" of all WMD capacity, which the Memo agreed it had not.
A copy of the memo was obtained by British journalist Michael Smith (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Smith_(newspaper_reporter)) and published in the The Sunday Times (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sunday_Times_(UK)) in May 2005. Though its authenticity has never been seriously challenged, the British and American governments have stated that the contents do not accurately reflect their official policy positions at the time.
Oh, gosh. Both governments denied it? Are you sure? Did they say unequivocally that it was false? (No...) Look at the phrase in bold type. Not really a denial. Why would they even say it has a basis in truth... that would basically say that the Iraq invasion was (secretly) premeditated. Not something a POTUS would have to deal with.

bladimz
04-03-2014, 02:52 PM
Sure, if you assume Congress is honest and has no ulterior motives...and that would be an unwise assumption.Do you think that the President feeds all its' intel info to congress. I don't think so. The Administration is just as (dis)honest as Congress. Again, what if Congress had known of the Dowing Street Memos. What would have happened?

Green Arrow
04-03-2014, 03:37 PM
Do you think that the President feeds all its' intel info to congress. I don't think so. The Administration is just as (dis)honest as Congress. Again, what if Congress had known of the Dowing Street Memos. What would have happened?

Hillary was First Lady before she was Senator. I think she understood the inner workings of Presidential intel better than most in Congress. Unless you believe she was like most First Ladies and had no real involvement with her husband's presidency, and I don't. She was there when her husband set the groundwork for Bush's invasion of Iraq, and voted for it when in Congress.

Bob
04-03-2014, 04:26 PM
Hillary was First Lady before she was Senator. I think she understood the inner workings of Presidential intel better than most in Congress. Unless you believe she was like most First Ladies and had no real involvement with her husband's presidency, and I don't. She was there when her husband set the groundwork for Bush's invasion of Iraq, and voted for it when in Congress.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FCVZlLBchVE

Mainecoons
04-03-2014, 04:36 PM
This video is just a right wing conspiracy. We all know those guys didn't say those things. Bush and Bush alone caused the Iraq war. These guys were all duped into voting for it. They really were against it before they were for it.

You don't have to thank me for straightening you out here. :rofl:

Bob
04-03-2014, 04:43 PM
This video is just a right wing conspiracy. We all know those guys didn't say those things. Bush and Bush alone caused the Iraq war. These guys were all duped into voting for it. They really were against it before they were for it.

You don't have to thank me for straightening you out here. :rofl:

Let me assist you.

They were all for it for many years. Well before Bush showed up.

:occasion14:

Mini Me
04-03-2014, 05:55 PM
American military action in Syria and Ukraine? Why sure. I'm positive we can dig a bunch more kids from families all prepped to defend our freedom. What she said is so incredibly irresponsible and simple-minded... is she being tutored by Dick?

She's reenacting a Winston Churchill moment, a rip off to be sure!

Jeezuzzz! Can't we ever get rid of these hideous people?

They just keep popping up in the con holer corporate news!

Mini Me
04-03-2014, 05:57 PM
Let me assist you.

They were all for it for many years. Well before Bush showed up.

:occasion14:

That true!

Bob
04-03-2014, 07:12 PM
Oh, gosh. Both governments denied it? Are you sure? Did they say unequivocally that it was false? (No...) Look at the phrase in bold type. Not really a denial. Why would they even say it has a basis in truth... that would basically say that the Iraq invasion was (secretly) premeditated. Not something a POTUS would have to deal with.

I told you the war was premeditated. But by Clinton and Kerry and those in the Clinton administration.

Sure, once the public law was passed in 1998, an invasion had to take place.

Say sweetness, have you bothered to study General Franks fine book about the two wars?

See post 54