What if the Democrats hadn't have gotten us into Iraq?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_Resolution#mediaviewer/File:H.J.Res._114_Iraq_Resolution_Votes_October_2002.png

Simple math makes a mockery of the OP In the Senate 29 Democratic senators voted no on the resolution. 21 dems voted yes.. that means that the majority of Dems in the chamber opposed the resolution. That means the Dems in the senate did not push us into the war.

In the House 126 Democratic senators voted no on the resolution. 81 dems voted yes.. That means that the majority of Dems in the chamber opposed the resolution. That means the Dems in the House did not push us into the war.

Now where did majorities come from? Why the GOP. All but one member of their Senate caucus voted yes That was a 48 to 1 split. In the House it was 215 yes votes by the GOP, and 6 votes against. The quotes are utterly meaningless in the context of the result.


.

 

I don't throw tantrums. I call liars out when they lie...I call morons out when they do stupid stuff like quote things that they made up and that no one ever said, and I call out folks who have no idea how to use the english language with any degree of precision to talk with adults. I have NEVER said that ANY of the intel from ANY of the 37 nations was false or altered. I said, that Bush portrayed absolute certainty as to the quality and accuracy of all of the intel surrounding Saddam's WMD stockpiles, even when he knew that doubt and uncertainty existed. When he portrays absolute certainty when he knows that is not the case... there is a word for that: It's called a LIE. I have NEVER claimed that dems were just agreeing with the president about anything. I really wish you'd quit calling me a liar, quit putting words in my mouth, and quit making stuff up... any chance you could work on some of that?

 

Absolutely. As a soldier myself I can tell you saddam presented no danger whatsoever to anyone in the west. Re Intel, the UK government provides a dodgy dossier after it became clear that Tony Blair wanted to support the us invasion. You should read more about how the information was cooked up.

I'd be interested to know what your reading

 

None of those guys, most of whom were relying on misinformation from the Administration, called for the invasion of Iraq.

All of those statements were made before the UN inspectors went into Iraq in early 2003, conducting many hundreds of unfettered, unannounced, spot inspections all over Iraq and finding nothing.

There was only one person who made the decision to get us into the Iraq quagmire in March 2003, and that was President Bush, manipulated by the neocons in his administration.

To say the Democrats "got us into" the Iraq war is blatantly false revisionist history, just the kind I've come to expect from the RW propaganda you all regurgitate here daily.

 

*If* Iraq had had WMDs, they had had them for 20 years, and except for the Iraq-Iran war 20 years earlier, had never used them or provided them to anyone. Iraq was no more of an "urgent threat" in 2003 as he was in 1983, when the Reagan administration cleared him to obtain those WMDs materials. There was no excuse or need to rush to war except to mollify the neocons agenda and Bush's own personal score.

 

Please list the 37 nations that "provided intelligence for the invasion of Iraq" and the intelligence they provided, as you claim, with a credible source. Thank you.

- - - Updated - - -

Please quote Hillary Clinton where she "made it very clear that war was needed" as you claim.

The RW propaganda bull(*)(*)(*)(*) is running particularly thick in this thread.

 

1: Are you new to the thread? This was already posted.

2. Lol this was in the first post. Pleaes copy and paste what ol' hildawg said in the quotes I provided.

 

the USA went in and tried to change there government and they got mad and attacked the. at least that's what most people in Israel think.

 

LOL there's no list of 37 nations that "provided intelligence for the invasion of Iraq" and not quote of any "hildawg" in the OP.

I knew your claims were bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Just like your OP and the rest of this thread.

 

Democrats got the US into Iraq? Are we talking about the invasion of 2003?

I had no idea G.W.Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, C.Rice, Wolfowitz, etc were Democrats.
Man, was I wrong.

 

Hillary Clinton, Joe Biden, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi....are Republicans?

 

No, but you have obviously been living under a rock for a decade or so.
Only someone completely blinded by a revisionist agenda would seriously claim that it wasn't Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, et al, but said Democrats who got the US into Iraq. That's why hundreds of thousands of people were marching the streets in European capitals at that time trying to stop Hillary and Biden.

Cognitive dissonance is extremely powerful, as we can clearly see.
Quite pathetic IMO.
Over and out.

 

What ifs are basically irrelevant. We will never know what Al Gore would have or haven't done because he wasn't elected. Remember Obama was promising to get us out of Afghanistan and Iraq as a candidate real quickly.

Once someone becomes presidents, all of a sudden he has the weight of the world on his shoulders. He is the one responsible whereas as a candidate or senator he wasn't. He also received more knowledge in classified briefing he didn't get as a candidate.

There is a huge difference.

 

I seem to remember us being in Iraq long before 1998.

 

Nothing. Malaki would have still been in control and would make anti-Sunni policies that fuel ISIS. The Syrian Civil War would have still happened creating ISIS.

The Iraqi withdrawl was already planned by Bush.

 

I really don't know what the outcome would have been. However, I do feel that had we not invaded Iraq, ISIS would not exist.