How can Cons claim they know everything Obama has done when they don't even know Bush started the war in?

Iraq?

Bush started a war based on false information. Democrats and Republicans in congress ****** up because they trusted him and they gave him their power to declare war.

H.J.Res. 114 (107th): Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002

SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION FOR USE OF UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES.

(a) AUTHORIZATION- The President is authorized to use the Armed Forces of the United States as he determines to be necessary and appropriate in order to--

(1) defend the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq; and

(2) enforce all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq.

Update:

H.J.Res. 114 (107th): Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002

http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/107/hjres114...

Update 2:

On my orders, coalition forces have begun striking selected targets of military importance to undermine Saddam Hussein's ability to wage war. These are opening stages of what will be a broad and concerted campaign.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yEHuek0w5e4

Youtube thumbnail

11 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    They didn't get the memos for one thing. But glued to Rush and Fox about Obama.

  • A few things; I am aware, I opposed the war before you Libs found it popular and I never was a supporter of Bush.

    The other thing you Libs always forget is that Bush was working off of CIA intelligence from the Clinton era http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-fSmSWI5EM

    Youtube thumbnail

    You also posted another link asking Cons why they think spending approved before Obama took office ceases when he is sworn in? But I have to ask you why do you think intelligence gathered before Bush was sworn in wasn't applied to the final decision of Iraq?

    Seeing the end of a fantastic movie is always great but for it to make sense you need context!

    President Clinton State of the Union 1998

    Together we must also confront the new hazards of chemical and biological weapons, and the outlaw states, terrorists and organized criminals seeking to acquire them. Saddam Hussein has spent the better part of this decade, and much of his nation's wealth, not on providing for the Iraqi people, but on developing nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. The United Nations weapons inspectors have done a truly remarkable job, finding and destroying more of Iraq's arsenal than was destroyed during the entire gulf war. Now, Saddam Hussein wants to stop them from completing their mission. I know I speak for everyone in this chamber, Republicans and Democrats, when I say to Saddam Hussein, "You cannot defy the will of the world", and when I say to him, "You have used weapons of mass destruction before; we are determined to deny you the capacity to use them again.

    Much of Clinton's foreign policy, especially in regards to Iraq, is what led to the attack on 9/11

  • 3 years ago

    Individuals who say which might be ridiculous. Although the stimulus and the bailouts weren't the correct thing, he idea they have been. No one can predict what is going to happen in any challenge, and monetary advisers recommended these moves. I suppose they saved us from an economy that will had been a lot worse.

  • Pepper
    Lv 5
    7 years ago

    I guess I cant say that I blame you libbies for constantly trying to change the subject awa y from Obama.

    We have been through all of this with you. The fact that dems were in favor of going into Iraq too and believed that there were WMDs. the fact that the UN was behind taking action to until it became clear that their food for oil scandal would be exposed and only then did the oppose action....if you dont get it by now you never will

  • What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Sorry but if Dennis Kucinich could vote against the war, so could hillary, biden and kerry.

    You have no justification for that (they were fooled by bush)

    There were indeed some democrats who voted against it.

    And since your leading party figures all authorized iraq war, you have no ground to blame Bush alone.

    They were NOT fooled at all. They were WAR-HUNGRY themselves.

  • 7 years ago

    Its always, merely a matter of timing... In the 1980's, Reagan was always talking about how he inherited, all the problems, from Carter... In a lot of ways, he actually did... From the rights perspective, that's no longer cool... You are to no longer, blame Bush... He's gone, never to return...

    The only problem with that train of thought... The rhetoric, is still alive & well...

  • Anonymous
    7 years ago

    Because the two have nothing to do with each other.

    Bush hasn't been president for 5 years now. Get with it.

    If Obama really cared about the troops in Iraq, he would pull them all out at one time, not leave some behind to defend themselves in lesser numbers.

  • Ditka
    Lv 7
    7 years ago

    It's fun to watch Libs do everything in their power to try and hide The Obama Scandals. Get me a bowl of Popcorn.

    Next they will be screaming RACISM..

  • Frank
    Lv 6
    7 years ago

    Because Clinton is the one that started the WMD hoax:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ps9j22G9HLE

    Youtube thumbnail

  • 7 years ago

    They only start paying attention to process when a Democrat is elected. Then, they still don't have the capacity to keep up, but turn to FOX and Rush to find out what they are supposed to think.

Still have questions? Get answers by asking now.