Who in here would still have invaded Iraq in 2003? We know JD , LL and LustingGayAss would!

So you're saying that Matthews had a remote control of some sort hooked up to Morell? And he said nothing of his own volition? You wouldn't last two seconds you bumbling and stumbling fool. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Actually that's exactly what the fuck Matthews did. Matthews directed someone to run a video clip that took a Cheney remark out of context to misrepresent Cheney's position, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas.


Morell's position, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas, is stated in his book, The Great War of Our Time:

The view that hard-liners in the Bush administration forced the intelligence community into its position on WMD is just flat wrong. No one pushed. The analysts were already there and they had been there for years, long before Bush came to office.

The most serious dissent came from the Department of Energy. While DOE analysts agreed that the Iraqis were in the process of reconstituting their nuclear weapons program, they did not buy the argument that aluminum tubes being purchased by Iraqis overseas were for centrifuges (pp. 89-90).

Actually that's exactly what the fuck Matthews did. Matthews directed someone to run a video clip that took a Cheney remark out of context to misrepresent Cheney's position, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas.


Morell's position, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas, is stated in his book, The Great War of Our Time: Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Bullshit. Why would he admit to something that was taken out of context. You've been caught again. He's admitting now that it was a lie. Bill Harlow wrote that book, not Morell. You've been caught again. Liar.

Bullshit. Why would he admit to something that was taken out of context. You've been caught again. He's admitting now that it was a lie. Bill Harlow wrote that book, not Morell. You've been caught again. Liar. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Matthews demonstrably lied and misrepresented the gist of Cheney's interview in the clip he played for Morell, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas, and Matthews used that device to misrepresent Morell's POV. The hyperlink to prove Matthews is a lying jackass was provided in the previous post, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas.

Iraq had nothing to do with Islam, dickshit. Originally Posted by WombRaider

Are you going for the stupid record? It is a pretty good try. Good luck with that plus the Sunnis and the Shitites (who are both in Iraq).

As for the OP. We all know that Hillary is the only person running (unless Joe Biden is in) that voted FOR war with Iraq. There is your answer. Completing your stupid thought means disqualifying Hillary from any office in the land.

Matthews demonstrably lied and misrepresented the gist of Cheney's interview in the clip he played for Morell, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas, and Matthews used that device to misrepresent Morell's POV. The hyperlink to prove Matthews is a lying jackass was provided in the previous post, you "#Grubered", freelance faggot, Odumbo Minion from Arkansas. Originally Posted by I B Hankering

He didn't write that book. You flat-out lied you piece of shit. He didn't misrepresent.

Are you going for the stupid record? It is a pretty good try. Good luck with that plus the Sunnis and the Shitites (who are both in Iraq).

As for the OP. We all know that Hillary is the only person running (unless Joe Biden is in) that voted FOR war with Iraq. There is your answer. Completing your stupid thought means disqualifying Hillary from any office in the land. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Why we invaded Iraq had NOTHING to do with Islam, you fucking mental midget. Jesus Christ. I can't explain it to you AND understand it for you. At some point you've got to jump in and help out.

As for the OP. We all know that Hillary is the only person running (unless Joe Biden is in) that voted FOR war with Iraq. There is your answer. Completing your stupid thought means disqualifying Hillary from any office in the land. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

As for the OP. We all know the "OP" did not mention Hillary. What the "OP" did say was "Who in here would still have invaded Iraq in 2003? We know that JD, LL and LustyGayAss would!"

JDIdiot, do you question the accuracy of the actual statement? Quite frankly, I can not say with 100% certainty that you would have supported the invasion because I was not reading your posts at the time. With that said, I am 99% certain, but not 100%.

JDIdiot, would you "still have invaded Iraq in 2003?" A simple yes or no, will suffice.

As for the OP itself, the only posters posting here now that I can respond with any degree of certainty, would be LLIdiot, WTF and myself. And to a lesser degree Turdy the Turdfly. As I recall Turdy came along shortly afterward, voicing his support. And still supports the invasion today.

I know for a fact that LLIdiot was on record supporting the ill fated and ill advised, spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq, during that fateful Spring. And Turdy shortly thereafter. I also know with 100% certainty that I opposed it at the time and so did WTF.

In a somewhat feeble attempt to deflect from that simple fact, LLIdiot tries to make the claim that WTF and I now have access to hindsight being 20/20. But that crippled dog won't hunt!

I vividly recall both WTF and I engaging LLIdiot (on ASPD) during the Spring of 2093. WTF and I were both in opposition, then and now. LLIdiot clearly supported the invasion, then and now!

What about everyone else? Did you support the invasion during the Spring of 2003? Knowing what we know today, do you still think that it was a good idea to have invaded Iraq twelve years ago?

I know for a fact that both WTF and I both were on record as opposing (then and now) the spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq. LLIdiot clearly was (and still is) on record as supporting the invasion, both then and now.

What about everyone else?

Who in here would still have invaded Iraq in 2003? We know JD , LL and LustingGayAss would! Knowing then what we know now? Originally Posted by WTF

Please post a link anywhere on this board where I said I would "Knowing then what we know now."

As for the OP itself, the only posters in here now that I can respond with any degree of certainty, would be LLIdiot, WTF and myself.

I know for a fact that LLIdiot was on record supporting the ill fated and ill advised, spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq at the time. I also know with 100% certainty that I opposed it at the time and so did WTF.

In a somewhat feeble attempt to deflect from that simple fact, LLIdiot tries to now make the claim that WTF and I have access to hindsight being 20/20. But that dog won't hunt!

I vividly recall both WTF and I engaging LLIdiot (on ASPD) at the time of the actual invasion. WTF and I were both in opposition, then and now. LLIdiot clearly supported the invasion, then and now!
Originally Posted by bigtex

Two things: Your distortion is this: You, BigTits, were ONLY OPPOSED to the timing of the invasion, because you wanted some additional time for inspections, but you were not opposed to the invasion. Just the timing. What you would not say, and still not say, is how much time needed to pass for you to agree to starting the invasion. And you still have not made that commitment. So you are literally wrong when you say you were "n opposition."

Your second distortion is my position. I have repeatedly stated that given the information that was reportedly available to the decision makers of the time and the overall basis for the invasion AT THE TIME the decision to invade was the proper decision .... thus my criticism of you repeatedly of your "20-20 hindsight xray" vision, because you have repeatedly claimed you were correct there were no WMDs found.

WTF has also repeatedly stated "no WMDs were found," so we should not have conducted the invasion. Again 20-20 hindsight. WTF may have been opposed to the invasion no matter what was found afterwards. Frankly, I do not recall WTF posting on the issue in the ASPD days. If he did.

To put that in context of today's reality ... look at Iran. #1: Does Iran have a functional, deliverable nuclear warhead? #2: Does Iran have a functioning program with facilities to develop a deliverable nuclear warhead? #3: How long will it take Iran to develop a functioning, deliverable nuclear warhead.

Neither you, BigTits, nor WTF can post a link in which I stated ..

"Knowing what is known now then I would have agreed with the invasion of Iraq in 2003."

And to be extremely specific with you guys, who delete, modify, distort, and interpret what people say to make your points ... "then" was the day before the invasion began .. and "now" is May 25, 2015.

And as far as I am concerned if you all cannot produce that link, either Eccie or ASPD, you are both liars. Don't put YOUR INTERPRETATIONS ON IT or DELETE PORTIONS OF WHAT I POSTED .... and give a link that is functional.

The purpose and motivation of this thread is one: To marginalize and vilify those persons who are listed in another effort on both your parts to discredit them with, again, distortions and misrepresentations. And you do it with your assertions of "100% certainty" .... As I said, my recollection of your position, BigTits, is the correct one, and you have so acknowledged on Eccie.

Logically, had WTF been opposed to the invasion regardless of what was found AFTERWARDS, then it would not be important for him to continually argue that Bush-Cheney LIED and that no WMDs were found. He would be ON RECORD PRIOR to the invasion that he was opposed to it REGARDLESS of what Iraq may be doing or what may be found.... after the invasion.

As it relates to current events: On YOUR CURRENT ANALYSIS of Iraq, you both, BigTits and WTF, would be opposed to military action against Iran to stop its WMDs programs BEFORE they develop a functioning, deliverable weapons system.

Two things: Your distortion is this: You, BigTits, were ONLY OPPOSED to the timing of the invasion, because you wanted some additional time for inspections, but you were not opposed to the invasion. Just the timing. What you would not say, and still not say, is how much time needed to pass for you to agree to starting the invasion. And you still have not made that commitment. So you are literally wrong when you say you were "n opposition." Originally Posted by LexusLover

As usual, LLIdiot cherry-picks my actual statement to say (or mean) what he wanted me to say (or mean), as opposed to what I actually stated.

What I said at the time was that we should allow Hans Blix's inspectors the time to complete their assigned task. At the time of the invasion, the assigned Weapon Inspector's were more than half way through, but still needed a few months to complete their assigned task. I stated at the time to allow the inspectors the time necesary to complete their task.

If they were to find WMD's, a limited invasion (to take out the WMD's) would certainly be justified. I further stated at the time that if the Insoectors did not find WMD's then there was absolutely no reason to invade Iraq.

LLIdiot, in the future get your facts straight prior to spewing your copious amount of bullshit.

While on the subject, where are those illusive WMD's? Didn't Rummy emphatically state at the time that the WMD's were "In an area in and around Tikrit and Baghdad?" Did he ever find them in that specific area! Or anywhere else in Iraq, for that matter?

Yes, LL's an Idiot! He was during the ill fated and ill advised, spring of 2003 invasion of Iraq and he still is today.

Yes, LLIdiot is consistent. He's consistently an Idiot!

As usual, LLIdiot cherry-picks my actual statement to say (or mean) what he wanted me to say (or mean), as opposed to what I actually stated. Originally Posted by bigtex

So far you are a liar. That's not "cherry picking"!

Produce the link. And cut the bullshit. Like I told you loudmouth.

You were working up to confirming on here you are a liar. You are there.

That's what you get when you post on the weekends.

Neither you, BigTits, nor WTF can post a link in which I stated ..

"Knowing what is known now then I would have agreed with the invasion of Iraq in 2003."

And to be extremely specific with you guys, who delete, modify, distort, and interpret what people say to make your points ... "then" was the day before the invasion began .. and "now" is May 25, 2015.

And as far as I am concerned if you all cannot produce that link, either Eccie or ASPD, you are both liars. Don't put YOUR INTERPRETATIONS ON IT or DELETE PORTIONS OF WHAT I POSTED .... and give a link that is functional. Originally Posted by LexusLover

So far you are a liar.

Produce the link. And cut the bullshit. Originally Posted by LexusLover

Where's the link?

Where's the link? Originally Posted by LexusLover

The more appropriate question would be, where's the link stating that WTF and/or I said something different. If he can corroborate what I said and I can corrabororate what he said, it is your burden to prove us otherwise.

While on the subject, WTF shoved the "link" up your smelly, worthless, Idiot ASS, when he started this thread.

Yes, LL is still an Idoiot!

And always will be!

Where's the link? Originally Posted by LexusLover

How about you answer the question now LL. Pretend you are Jeb Bush...Knowing then what you know now would you still invade Iraq in 2003?

The more appropriate question would be, where's the link stating that WTF and/or I said something different. If he can corroborate what I said and I can corrabororate what he said, it is your burden to prove us otherwise.

While on the subject, WTF shoved the "link" up your smelly, worthless, Idiot ASS, when he started this thread.

Yes, LL is still an Idoiot!

And always will be! Originally Posted by bigtex

He gave you a beat down with the previous posts, proving his assertions, and you still lie away. You are lame.