Should Dubyah get impeached?
for lieing about going to war? cus we didnt find any weapons of mass destruction
I think its bullshit, we helped the iraqis out for there freedom, regardless wether or not we found anything.
I think its bullshit, we helped the iraqis out for there freedom, regardless wether or not we found anything.
First of all, it's spelled lying.
I believe that he should be impeached if he lied about the reasons for going to war. And I am a fight to the death conservative who believes in the war 100%. But, I do not believe he lied. I think that he was either given bad intelligence, Saddam cleaned house before we invaded, or we just haven't found them yet.
There will be an investigation...we are owed an explanation one way or the other. Even without WMD's I believe that the war was just.
I believe that he should be impeached if he lied about the reasons for going to war. And I am a fight to the death conservative who believes in the war 100%. But, I do not believe he lied. I think that he was either given bad intelligence, Saddam cleaned house before we invaded, or we just haven't found them yet.
There will be an investigation...we are owed an explanation one way or the other. Even without WMD's I believe that the war was just.
Well I didnt mean to come off as a liberal, I meant to say that I heard on Savage Nation that certain groups want bush impeached for saying that there was womd(weapons of mass destruction) in Iraq when in the end we didnt find any.
they stated that he was lying about the reasons for war, I honestly think that is bullshit becuase there were plenty more reasons for the war, and we had enough suspiousion(sp) to go in to find womd, but appanrently some groups dont belive so, I just want to find out some people opinions on the matter
they stated that he was lying about the reasons for war, I honestly think that is bullshit becuase there were plenty more reasons for the war, and we had enough suspiousion(sp) to go in to find womd, but appanrently some groups dont belive so, I just want to find out some people opinions on the matter
Getting rid of Saddam and his sons is good enough for me. Them dudes needed to go. Of course, the people are already turning on us, so I hope we can get a new government in there quickly so we can get the hell out before we get drawn into another conflict.
A little chin music
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,655
Likes: 0
From: Cleveland, Ohio - Rock 'n Roll capitol of the World
The far left wants everyone to believe that Bush's one and only reason to go to war was WMD. But if you paid attention, he went to Congress and presented other facts (nuclear threat, threat to his neighboors, own people, terrorism supporter). These facts were considered part of the package as well, so when Congress voted to authorize him to use military force, it was contingent on many facets, not just one. There is no way you could impeach him even if every dem in Congress wanted to. It would not get past the first vote to authorize the inquiry. As for the WMD themselves, it could take a very long time to find them..... they had a lot of time to hide them very well. It's not out of the question to realistically give a few years to find this stuff. You think they're just gonna have them sitting out in the open with maps and directions to each and every one of them complete with GPS locators and signs that say "Here I am"?
If Saddam didn't have WMD, then why did he stall so much and play the games that he did with the UN inspectors? Remember that it was he who could have averted the war by saying, "nope, don't have 'em...come on in and let me show you." But we all know that didn't happen. If anyone has any doubt about Saddam's weapons programs, I would suggest reading "Saddam's Bomb Maker" by Khidhir Hamza. Hamza was in charge of Saddam's Nuclear program, and he also speaks of Saddam's biological and chemical weapons program. Considering he was an "inside" guy, I think he would know better than most.
Oh, to stay on topic..."No."
Oh, to stay on topic..."No."
Personally, if I were Saddam, and it was JUST the US trying to get in, I'd say go to hell. It's kind of like when cops show up at your door wanting to search your place. I'd say to go to hell if they didnt have a warrant. They have no right in my home. HOWEVER, since the United Nations said let them in, that would act as a warrant. So at first, him playing hard to get was only natural. Thats possibly why he stalled. I would do the same thing. If the UN didnt do anything about saying "let them in" and it was only the US trying to send in inspectors, hell yea Saddam wouldve told them to f*ck off.
A little chin music
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 2,655
Likes: 0
From: Cleveland, Ohio - Rock 'n Roll capitol of the World
Originally posted by dliske
If Saddam didn't have WMD, then why did he stall so much and play the games that he did with the UN inspectors? Remember that it was he who could have averted the war by saying, "nope, don't have 'em...come on in and let me show you." But we all know that didn't happen. If anyone has any doubt about Saddam's weapons programs, I would suggest reading "Saddam's Bomb Maker" by Khidhir Hamza. Hamza was in charge of Saddam's Nuclear program, and he also speaks of Saddam's biological and chemical weapons program. Considering he was an "inside" guy, I think he would know better than most.
Oh, to stay on topic..."No."
If Saddam didn't have WMD, then why did he stall so much and play the games that he did with the UN inspectors? Remember that it was he who could have averted the war by saying, "nope, don't have 'em...come on in and let me show you." But we all know that didn't happen. If anyone has any doubt about Saddam's weapons programs, I would suggest reading "Saddam's Bomb Maker" by Khidhir Hamza. Hamza was in charge of Saddam's Nuclear program, and he also speaks of Saddam's biological and chemical weapons program. Considering he was an "inside" guy, I think he would know better than most.
Oh, to stay on topic..."No."


