Quote:
|
Originally Posted by big_pth
What weapons of mass destruction? To my knowledge there haven't been any found in Iraq.
|
I was kidding with you and telling you that you forgot two favorite liberal lines about Usama escaping in Tora Bora (supposedly because Bush did not try hard enough to kill him or some BS like that- Don't even get me started on the 10 (yes TEN) times that Bill Clinton had a chance to take him out according to the head of the Bin Laden unit for the CIA who is definitely not a Republican, but Slick Willie was too much of a wussy to give the order)
I was also kidding about the other favorite liberal line about weapons of mass destruction.
First off, and I can send this to you or publish it if you want, every leading intelligence service in the world as well as every leading democrat thought they had stockpiles of weapons (I still think they did and they are in Syria or buried in the desert), and in fact all gave speeches about it attempting to appear hawkish for political gain
Here is where you tell me that the democrats thought this because Bush told them. BS!!!
It was in fact a policy of the Slick Willie admin to change the regime in Iraq, and part of it was due to weapons of mass destruction.
I was kidding in the beginning of this post, but my blood started to boil thinking of your retorts, and I thought I would give you a little bidness!
How many people have to get killed in a gas attack in the Kurdish north or in Iran to constitute WMD? I thought liberals were supposed to be compassionate and want us to stop the genocide in the Sudan. I am sure the 300,000 (we have found this many in mass graves so far) plus Iraqis that were tortured and killed by Saddam appreciate you saying there were no WMD's
Lay off the kool-aid bro. GO MAVS!