Your bias always omits the fact that the congress passed the war in Iraq, Clinton (Hillary and Bill, Al Gore, Kerry, etc endorsed it). There were WMD with toxic gases in Iraq too. And your man Obama ran for election and promised to be out by 2009.
What a bunch of hypocrite warhawks dems have turned out to be since Obama has been in office.
Libya wasn't bothering the US in any manner .. perhaps the central banks and big oil were being inconvenienced put out by Qaddafi's policies .. who's the Nobel Peace Prize Obama's puppet master ... take off your sill democrap glasses.
We will have to agree to disagree on this one, but the WMD story was untrue, no matter who believed in it or supported it or voted for it. It was a crock, plain and simple.
As for Obama morphing from peace candidate to war hawk, yes it is true that happened. Is that hypocrisy or it is growing into the office? The answer is probably in the eye of the beholder.
Well have to tell the thousands of Kurds that Saddam killed with mustard gas ... really they should be alive and healthy now ... because some people think it is inconvenient to hear that Mustard gas is not a weapon of mass destruction.
Those folks who died in the Japan trains by sarin gas by terrorists .. them too, they should be alive now and all those who were dead or injured .. come one .. toughen up some.
Did he grow in to the massive increase in drone bombings in Yemen, Pakistan etc.. .. escalation of the war in Afghanistan ... I guess it is what you mean by the word is and the eye of the beholder. Yes, well have to agree to disagree, especially when the president then 'warns' to other dictators in the Middle East 13 and particularly Syria 13 that they could be next.
I do find it interesting that Karzai Afghanistan would side with Pakistan if it came to a war between the US and Pakistan.
The president with the Nobel peace prize is ready to kick some more A.
First off, Americans like a president who kicks ass and takes names. Otherwise how do you explain George W's popularity for most of his two terms?
Secondly, the Kurd/mustard gas incident took place in the 1980's, before the first Gulf War and the guy who was president at the time, oddly enough his name was also Bush, argued vigorisly that Saddam had NOT used chemical weapons against the Kurds. It seems likely now that he did, but at the time the US said, officially that he hadn't.
Lastly, there is a big difference between supporting the Arab Spring, a true grass roots democracy campaign and accepting as fact pure bullshit from that guy called "Curveball" concerning fantasies about WMD that didn't exist in 2002/2003 Iraq.
The facts, the REAL facts, just don't work for you on this topic, Big T. Just let it go. Your guy bought into a fantasy about a threat that didn't exist. The guy in office now has tried to clean up all the mess, with mixed success at best. Your attempts to spin Obama as worse than Bush just don't jibe with reality.
WMD gas was used by the terrorists in Iraq and I doubt they ordered from Amazon....
What are you talking about? Is it about the time I already mentioned, when Saddam used chemical weapons against the Kurds? Those weapons were destroyed after the first Gulf War in 1991 and even if a few of those had been hidden away, they don't have a long shelf life and would have been near to useless in 2002/2003, and that is even if they had existed at all at that time.
One more thing, they were artillery weapons which had to be shot out of a cannon or something similar. Not really useful as an instrument of internatioal terror.
It is sad how you guys hold on to the 100% discredited WMD story. It wasn't true in 2002 and it still isn't true today. Face the facts, the WMD weren't real, they were a fantasy.
Al Gore is an idiot .. America already had 8 years of Billy Bob corruption and did not need anything more from that administration, and I repeat, Gore is an idiot.
Gunboat Kerry could only be elected in a state like Massachusetts or Kawilphonia .. THAT is how GW won those elections, cuz democrats are stupid voters for the most part. The only reason that Obomba got elected is because the Amercian people hated GW's wars so much, his approval rating was terribly low .. so there goes your stupid comment about people loving war monger presidents. ... so what does Obomba do .. he escalates the war in Afghanistan, escalates drone bombing in pakystan and Yemen and stays in Iraq two more years than he promised he'd be out .. and he's not out yet .. and when he means out he really means 15,000 troops and countless contractors.
Apparently you feel that the end justifies the means, in the past year alone ... instead of capturing an unarmed Osama and giving him a trial ... he was shot in the head and buried at sea without a trial - there was one guy in the compound with a handgun and about 50 armed special forces .. and they couldn't capture him???
Drone bombing and killing an American citizen without due process and
Supporting an illegal war that ended up with a Qaddafi sodomy, torture and then shot in the head
I'm glad I didn't vote for Obomba .. but you did .. and you'll vote for him again .. cuz he's just trying to clean up some messes that GW left him ... that is utter BS.
GW was not my guy .... but we all know that Obama is your guy ... I voted for Ron Paul in the last election ... and BTW .. Al Bore .. he would have attacked Iraq too .. do I have to repost those democrat quotes about Iraq and Saddam .. AGAIN and AGAIN? Those are the facts Gramps. Obama has let the people down more than GW did - and he has managed to do this in less than 4 years - it took GW to do those things.
Baron, It really does not good showing Gramps the facts of toxic chemicals and gasses and missiles that have been documented in many journals and articles ... those are just inconvenient truths to him.
Look, Big T, Iraq had no offensive WMD in 2002 and you can whine all you want, but that changes nothing. The WMD story was totally fabricated and an empty artillary shell that had chemical weapons in it ten years earlier only proves that there was no 'there' there.
Gramps
It is a clear indication of your own bias, Big T, that you think Obama is worse than Bush on this topic.
Bush got us involved in a war that cost a trillion dollars, and untold lives, based on purely nonfactual arguments. A ten year and counting involvement
Obama got us involved in Libya, also with some disregard for facts, but at a cost of about a billion dollars and no American lives lost. A total involvement of a few months.
Only a person wearing conservative colored glasses could compare these two events and decided that the Obama/Libyan involvement is "worse" than that Bush/Iraq one.