Bush is a Buffoon

Published on December 15, 2005 By COL Gene In Politics

Yesterday George W. Bush, out of his own mouth, documented that he is a Buffoon!
For the very first time he admitted he took this country to war, the most important decision any president can make, based on faulty information. These are the Presidentâ own words, "It is true that much of the intelligence turned out to be wrong. As President I'm responsible for the decision to go into Iraq."BR>
That would have been an important admission had Bush stopped there. However what followed is hard to believe. His next statement was, "Saddam was a threat and the American people and the world is better off because he is no longer in power."BR>
If the information that said he was a danger was incorrect as the President admitted, how was Saddam a threat? What possible justification for going to war existed with a country that did not have the means to be a threat? There are many tyrants in this world that wish others harm. They are NOT a threat if they do not have the means of being a danger.

Even when Bush admits he was wrong, according to him he was right. How foolish Bush make himself look. This great country deserves a leader that can take responsibility for their mistakes not one that acts like GWB.

Comments (Page 5)

COL Gene

on Dec 16, 2005

That is correct. However, Saddam did not have an Army (of any strength), Air Force or Navy. Unlike Japan he was not creating a military power that was a threat to the United States. Of all the potential problem countries in the world, Iraq was low on that list and there was no reason to attack Iraq in early 2003. What was the urgency to act in early 2003? We had the UN Inspectors back in Iraq and the no fly zones. This war was an ELECTIVE war aginst a country that was no threat to America. Bush was wrong to attack Iraq. Congress would NEVER have approved attacking Iraq for any reason other then a danger to the U S. Not for Free elections, Not to enforce U N Resolutions, Not because he was Evil.

Island Dog

on Dec 16, 2005

Congress would NEVER have approved attacking Iraq for any reason other then a danger to the U S. Not for Free elections, Not to enforce U N Resolutions, Not because he was Evil.

Col and your hindsight. You know nothing col.

The Congress voted to support the war.
Democrats said Saddam was a threat.
Democrats said Saddam had WMD.
Clinton indicted Saddam had ties to al-qaeda.

You col, are a hypocrit and democratic apologist.

Island Dog

on Dec 16, 2005

Anyways col. It doesn't matter. We are in Iraq and Bush will be President until '08. There is nothing you or your mindless blogs can do about it.

COL Gene

on Dec 16, 2005

Congress voted to support the war BECAUSE of WMD and the claim that Iraq was a threat to the U S.

Bush has used three reasons for this war.

WMD and threst
Saddam was Evil and broke U N Resolutions
Establish a democratic Iraq with free elections.

Island Dog

on Dec 16, 2005

Congress voted to support the war BECAUSE of WMD and the claim that Iraq was a threat to the U S.

Col, Congress was not misled, lied to, or anything else the radical left tells you. You don't know what Congress would and wouldn't have voted for. Now get back to your pointless rants.

Island Dog

on Dec 16, 2005

Col, why are you using Michael Moore lies in your posts. I guess you like being proved wrong.

MythicalMino

on Dec 16, 2005

Because the "moderate republican" Col Gene is about as moderate as Michael Moore's left hand.

For someone to take to heart the crap that spews out of Michael Moore's crusty mouth has to be far-left.....far far left.

Like the fairytale kingdom of Far Far A-Left

Because the only things the old Col is really telling us is his version of the Big Bad Wolf and the Three Little Pigs

COL Gene

on Dec 16, 2005

Every member of Congress I heard talk about the War resolution said the same thing-- they voted because they were told Saddam had WMD and was a threat to this country. Neither of those things are true and that means if the facts were known, there would not have been a vote to go to war!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No one said they voted for war so the Iraqi people could vote or because Saddam was evil or violated UN Resolutions. This has NOTHING to do with the Right or left. These are the facts and you can replay what Bush, Cheney and Rummy said in late 2002 and early 2003 before we went to war!

Island Dog

on Dec 16, 2005

I guess you just heard Ted Kennedy and Pelosi then. I have heard just the opposite.

Neither of those things are true and that means if the facts were known, there would not have been a vote to go to war!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's only your opinion col. Stop trying to present it as fact.

COL Gene

on Dec 16, 2005

Show me where ANY members of Congress said at the time of the vote that they voted to go to war for ANY reason other then WMD and that Iraq was a threat to This Country? You are all guilty of what the GOP claims the Democrats do-- Try and Change Histrory.

Island Dog

on Dec 16, 2005

You are all guilty of what the GOP claims the Democrats do-- Try and Change Histrory.

And you are guilty of what all liberals do. Lie and distort facts because you can't stand up for anything.

Show me where ANY members of Congress said at the time of the vote that they voted to go to war for ANY reason other then WMD and that Iraq was a threat to This Country?

You are confusing yourself now col. You claimed before that they voted only for WMD's, now it's both WMD's and a threat. What a hypocrit.

Island Dog

on Dec 16, 2005

But since you asked.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October of 1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retained some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capability. Intelligence reports also indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons, but has not yet achieved nuclear capability." -- Robert Byrd, October 2002

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons. Should he succeed in that endeavor, he could alter the political and security landscape of the Middle East, which as we know all too well affects American security." -- Hillary Clinton, October 10, 2002

"Saddam Hussein's regime represents a grave threat to America and our allies, including our vital ally, Israel. For more than two decades, Saddam Hussein has sought weapons of mass destruction through every available means. We know that he has chemical and biological weapons. He has already used them against his neighbors and his own people, and is trying to build more. We know that he is doing everything he can to build nuclear weapons, and we know that each day he gets closer to achieving that goal." -- John Edwards, Oct 10, 2002

"There is no doubt that Saddam Hussein's regime is a serious danger, that he is a tyrant, and that his pursuit of lethal weapons of mass destruction cannot be tolerated. He must be disarmed." -- Ted Kennedy, Sept 27, 2002

COL Gene

on Dec 16, 2005

The threat was because of the WMD. SHOW me ANY Member of Congress that said the voted for the war for ANY reason 0ther then WMD and the threat to this country!

Unless you can prove that , you are all full of BS.

Island Dog

on Dec 16, 2005

"He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, "

Stop being such a hypocrit. Saddam was a threat, so you point is done as usual. You lost again col.

You still haven't proven any of your points. How pathetic.

COL Gene

on Dec 16, 2005

How was Saddam a threat? He had no military or WMD. Face it we went to war for no good reason. We went to war predicated on conditions that DID NOT EXIST. What is pathetic is that we sent our brave military into harms way and there was no threat and therefore NO REASON to send them to war. In 2003, NO ONE said we are risking our military to spread Democracy in Iraq. NO ONE said we were sending our military to their death to enforce U N Resolutions or because Saddam was an Evil Dictator. WE SAID WE ARE SENDING THEM to defend America and now find out that there was NOTING to defend aginst in Iraq!!!!!

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!