Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

I did a search, and of course Bush and War came up, but nothing like this. So if there's a thread about this already, my bad.

After hearing a report on the Daily Show(click on "Save the Date!" on this site: http://www.comedycentral.com/shows/the_daily_show/videos/jon_stewart/index.jhtml ) I decided to look it up for myself, hoping it was a joke...but it's true, with or without WMDs we were going to war anyway. It was even on a set date, March 10


http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/27/international/europe/27memo.html?ex=1301115600&en=be186887fe0c83a2&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1002236510

This last link is about a book called "The Price of Loyalty" by Paul O'Neill, U.S. Treasurer. He reveals that Bush was set on invading Iraq just DAYS after his inauguration. Eight months BEFORE 9-11 ever even happened.

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/10/oneill.bush/

I really don't have much else to say. If Republicans didn't control the government this guy would've been impeached already. ****ing scum. He's cost the country thousands of lives and $300 billion, for nothing.

Well if you believe Deano then the War was going to happen because of the Illuminati.

Politically speaking there has been talk for some time that before Sept. 11 the Bush administration was looking at potential ways of going to Iraq. And the initial attempts to tie Sept. 11 to the Iraqi regime. To what degree is it true? Hard to say, but it seems far from surprising.

I don't know if the Iraqi War was inevitable (it may well have been, though IMO it did not have to happen on the heels of 9/11, and it should've been far better planned), but I do feel that the following Is inevitable...

If you allow any terrorist state to make nukes, at some point that weapon will be given to terrorists-in-the-field to act as the delivery system.

Originally posted by Mindship
I don't know if the Iraqi War was inevitable (it may well have been, though IMO it did not have to happen on the heels of 9/11, and it should've been far better planned), but I do feel that the following Is inevitable...

If you allow any terrorist state to make nukes, at some point that weapon will be given to terrorists-in-the-field to act as the delivery system.


Yes indeed we were headed over there regardless. Makes me all warm and fuzzy to know we fight in Iraq rather then anything happening in the fields of the USA today.

Yeah, nothing happens. Only the continued erosion of your civil liberties...

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Yeah, nothing happens. Only the continued erosion of your civil liberties...

Whio needs them anyways...

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Yeah, nothing happens. Only the continued erosion of your civil liberties...

We had those?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Yeah, nothing happens. Only the continued erosion of your civil liberties...

Happens in war in any country the suckass thing is that it carries over after war.

where's the brainwashed "GO DUBYA" posts?

mussollini...iraq is bush's abyssinia

Originally posted by PVS
where's the brainwashed "GO DUBYA" posts?

Go dubya.

It doesn't count if it's not in all caps.

Noone is even surprised by this news, huh?

Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
Noone is even surprised by this news, huh?

not really. Well, I can't speak for everyone, but when I found this out I wasn't shocked or awed.

From the Bush=Hitler thread:

Originally posted by Capt_Fantastic
War with the middle east was always going to happen as long as the military industrial complex remains in the pocket of big buisness.

But, to add to that, war = profits. It always has. Typically, war ends up helping an economy. However, when the profits aren't directed back into the economy that pays for it, a depression of that economy occurs. In the case of the Iraq war, the profits are being funneled into the pockets of the big buisness that lobbied for the war in the first place.

Originally posted by soleran30
Happens in war in any country the suckass thing is that it carries over after war.

The problem is you stated there are no repercussions for Americans from your presdent waging a never-ending war...*Ding-dong*...There are.

Originally posted by Arachnoidfreak
Noone is even surprised by this news, huh?

This is recent news though, is it?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
This is recent news though, is it?

not really, no.

Oh, whoops. I meant to type 'This isn't recent news though, is it?'.

(Because I know it isn't)

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Oh, whoops. I meant to type 'This isn't recent news though, is it?'.

(Because I know it isn't)

My bad then.

^ Ya think?

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
The problem is you stated there are no repercussions for Americans from your presdent waging a never-ending war...*Ding-dong*...There are.



This is recent news though, is it?

No I didn't, are you really that retarded.

Originally posted by soleran30
No I didn't, are you really that retarded.

Is that a question? If it is, my answer is: I don't think so. Are you really that forgetful?

Here's your post again:

Originally posted by soleran30
Yes indeed we were headed over there regardless. Makes me all warm and fuzzy to know we fight in Iraq rather then anything happening in the fields of the USA today.

Did you notice the bit where you say you'd rather be fighting over there than anything happening the the US? If you did, you'll probably notice where you went wrong. Things are happening in the US as a result of what you're doing over there.

Silly boy.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Is that a question? If it is, my answer is: I don't think so. Are you really that forgetful?

Here's your post again:



Did you notice the bit where you say you'd rather be fighting over there than anything happening the the US? If you did, you'll probably notice where you went wrong. Things are happening in the US as a result of what you're doing over there.

Silly boy.


No you really are, I understand now.

I'd be surprised if you could understand anything. You obviously don't understand the words that you type.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
I'd be surprised if you could understand anything. You obviously don't understand the words that you type.

Typical, your wit is awesome.

Thank you. It is amazing. Sadly, I can't say the same for you, Oscar.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Thank you. It is amazing. Sadly, I can't say the same for you, Oscar.
uh huh

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
This is recent news though, is it?

Yes, half of it is actually. The Daily Show report is barely a week old and the New York Times wrote about the memo April 5th or so.

The book is old news though.

Originally posted by Ya Krunk'd Floo
Oh, whoops. I meant to type 'This isn't recent news though, is it?'.

(Because I know it isn't)

Wording it a different way isn't going to change my response, the memo report isnt even a week old, so it is recent.

what isnt recent is the book

But it is old news, isn't it? The O'Neill CNN link that you originally posted is dated January 14, 2004. That's old.

Right...that's what I just said, the book isn't recent, it just goes with the topic, so I added it.

That doesnt mean the other links are outdated.

All I'm saying is that the thread's topic is old news. Ya dig?