Al Qaeda materials found in Iraq!

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by shartley

A fact conveniently forgotten by the left...

[Zygote]

From what I remember, and I may be wrong, Bush was able to declar war himself, an action only Congress can take due to some loophole left open from the first Gulf War. We never undeclared war or some rubbish like that...I can 't really remember. Most of Congress fell in line for fear of appearing unpatriotic and are now saying they opposed the war even though they supported it at the time (most notably spineless democrats). Some of us have a different idea of what patriotism is and won't be voting for these individuals in the next election.

[FactsOfLife]

Originally posted by Zygote
From what I remember, and I may be wrong, Bush was able to declar war himself, an action only Congress can take due to some loophole left open from the first Gulf War. We never undeclared war or some rubbish like that...I can 't really remember. Most of Congress fell in line for fear of appearing unpatriotic and are now saying they opposed the war even though they supported it at the time (most notably spineless democrats). Some of us have a different idea of what patriotism is and won't be voting for these individuals in the next election.

Oh please, the Demoncrats were falling all over themselves while Clinton was in office to do EXACTLY what the Bush Admin has done now.

So don't hand us that garbage about the Demoncrats suddenly becoming spineless.

I mean I can believe they're spineless but it didn't just happen recently.....

[1stdeadeye]

Last October (2002), COngress authorized the use of force. Bush did not and can not declare war on his own! That is a remenant of Vietnam. No President can arbitrarily declare war without Congress.

Oh yeah, Saddam got a new job:

[shartley]

Originally posted by Zygote
From what I remember, and I may be wrong, Bush was able to declar war himself, an action only Congress can take due to some loophole left open from the first Gulf War. We never undeclared war or some rubbish like that...I can 't really remember. Most of Congress fell in line for fear of appearing unpatriotic and are now saying they opposed the war even though they supported it at the time (most notably spineless democrats). Some of us have a different idea of what patriotism is and won't be voting for these individuals in the next election.

[Zygote]

I didn't mean to infer that they have only recently become spineless, just that this one of the more glaring recent examples.

[Miscue]

Originally posted by aaron_mag


We were told that the danger was imminent, that there were WMD waiting to be used against us.

WMDs are not necessary for a terrorist attack, they just make things worse. In fact, almost all terrorist attacks are done w/o WMDs! The towers weren't taken down with WMDs. You don't need WMDs to blow up buildings. You don't need WMDs to kill a lot of people. If you totally drop the subject of WMDs, Saddam is STILL dangerous! Funneling of money, supporting terrorist groups such that they can arm themselves and train... this does not require WMDs to do this! This is reason enough to take him out. The possibility of having WMDs is even MORE reason, and not the ONLY JUSTIFICATION, for taking him out - not by a long shot. It his intentions and capability that require us to take him out, not details of what's in his arsenal.

If terrorists kill thousands of people w/o WMD, what is the difference if they had used it? Talking about WMDs is talking about details of how terrorists kill people, and we are debating whether or not one way of killing people is more acceptable than another. This topic of whether there are WMDs or not (and I believe they will find them if they have not already) is completely and entirely stupid - it misses the whole point of the problem.

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by aaron_mag
We were presented with an imminent threat that so far we have not seen.

Bush said specifically in his speeches that we had to strike BEFORE the threat became imminent, meaning that it wasn't imminent now, only that it could be.

[Southpaw]

Edit: I don't think it's a good idea to post so much of a copyrighted article. The link suffices. -Miscue

Want to find out Who read the LINK

[1stdeadeye]

BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!

Danish Troops have uncovered possible Chemical Weapon Mortar Shells!

Click here for the story on the Blister Gas!

[Miscue]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
BREAKING NEWS!!!!!!!

Danish Troops have uncovered possible Chemical Weapon Mortar Shells!

Click here for the stroy on the Blister Gas!

Bush lied to us! Oh wait...

[p8ntball1016]

Turns out the tests were negative. And now to post what i was going to. Saddam Hussein apparently urged Fedayeen militia to avoid Al Qaeda.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/8030.html

[Jack_Dubious]

Bill O'Reilly: "And I said on my program, if, if the Americans go in and overthrow Saddam Hussein and it's clean, he had nothing, I will apologize to the nation, and I will not trust the Bush administration again." 3/8/2003

Charles Krauthammer: "Hans Blix had five months to find weapons. He found nothing. We've had five weeks. Come back to me in five months. If we haven't found any, we will have a credibility problem." 4/22/03

[aaron_mag]

From MSNBC:
Oh and you guys can trust him.....he is a Republican and not "loony liberal".

[Albinonewt]

Aaron:

We've said that though. I've been very clear that the number of possible or likely connections is high enough for me to err on the side of caution and assume links. I fully recognize no "smoking gun". I just don't care, when it's this important I'm willing to make a best guess based on the ton of small pieces of evidence.