Archive

Dick Cheney--Idiot

  • Footwedge
    Only in America can an imbecile like him write the following in a WSJ op-ed......."Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many."

    He...of all people. Nobody was more wrong than dickless Cheney...and his claims of Iraq's WMD. Lucipher has your room clean and ready for you Dick. Enjoy your afterlife.
  • bases_loaded
    Iraq had WMDs. http://www.tpnn.com/2014/06/20/bush-vindicated-islamic-terrorists-overtake-saddams-wmd-facilities/
  • Mohican00
    They had and used WMDs in the 80's during their war with Iran. As for the 2003 invasion, lol, well...

    http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=298775

    but to put a positive spin on this story for you
    According to one intelligence report, the WMD and the complex's ability to produce chemical or biological agents have been severely reduced as a result of the Iraq wars waged by President George H.W. Bush and later by his son President George W. Bush.
    http://www.examiner.com/article/isis-seizes-saddam-s-wmd-storage-facility-british-officials
  • cruiser_96
    Someone buy Footwedge a beer!

    But he would have gotten away with if it wasn't for you meddling kids and that pesky dog.
  • Footwedge
    Clueless...
  • Footwedge
    Mohican00;1628412 wrote:They had and used WMDs in the 80's during their war with Iran. As for the 2003 invasion, lol, well...

    http://www.intelligence.senate.gov/press/record.cfm?id=298775

    but to put a positive spin on this story for you



    http://www.examiner.com/article/isis-seizes-saddam-s-wmd-storage-facility-british-officials
    Clueless...part II.
  • majorspark
    Footwedge;1628408 wrote:Only in America can an imbecile like him write the following in a WSJ op-ed......."Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many."

    He...of all people. Nobody was more wrong than dickless Cheney...and his claims of Iraq's WMD. Lucipher has your room clean and ready for you Dick. Enjoy your afterlife.
    Lucifer is going to have to wait a while. Cheney has the heart of a 25yr old.
  • Footwedge
    Gonna requote 5 deferment Dick said...

    ......."Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many."

    This coming from a guy who, along with a bunch of neoconservative zealots, hoodwinked America into an endless abyss of bloodshed in Iraq. Approximately 4500 of America's finest needlessly killed in a war based on one lie after another. Another 40,000 plus servicemen maimed for life either physically or mentally.

    The premise for war? The pretext for war? WMD's. Our 16 intelligence agencies...not one had a shred of convincing evidence that Hussein was holding WMD. On the contrary, Hans Blix had inspected 95% of the supposed WMD cites as early as 3 weeks prior to shock and awe day...only th find...well...nothing. Yet this fuckwad has the nads to say this....

    ......."Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many."

    He'll get his come judgement day. Ain't gonna be pretty for 5 deferment Dick...who had "better things to do" than serve his country.
  • believer
    We have morons in the WH and idiots on Capitol Hill currently ruining this country and you're still obsessed with Dick Cheney?
  • isadore
    majorspark;1628425 wrote:Lucifer is going to have to wait a while. Cheney has the heart of a 25yr old.
    he should give it back.
  • gut
    Footwedge;1628426 wrote: The premise for war? The pretext for war? WMD's. Our 16 intelligence agencies...not one had a shred of convincing evidence that Hussein was holding WMD.
    I think you're confusing "convincing" with "certainty". And LMAO if you think WMD was the pretext or only reason for war. Maybe Obama will set aside some time to explain to you the concept of "selling" an idea and building popular support.

    And I agree that the American people should never be victimized by sales jobs. But it continues to happen - and continues to work - because partisan idiots only selectively care.


    On the other hand, I don't see economically challenged liberals whining about "no blood for oil" any more....progress, I suppose.
  • Mohican00
    Footwedge;1628424 wrote:Clueless...part II.
    Yeah explain to me the clueless part.

    I was defending you, dumbass
  • rydawg5
    Disgusting
  • gut
    Although I prefer former POTUS, VP's and candidates keep their mouths shut...when the current occupier of the oval office keeps blaming the prior administration then all bets are off.

    Some of the water carriers are actually blaming this on W - 5.5 years later Iraq/ISIS is W's fault.
  • HitsRus
    Anybody who thinks we went to war in Iraq because of WMD's is "clueless". WMD's was the selling point that used to convince some of the others in the administration and to get media support for the war. Dick Cheney is responsible for that....and for tainting the careers of some very good people....namely Colin Powell and Condi Rice.
  • gut
    HitsRus;1628503 wrote:Anybody who thinks we went to war in Iraq because of WMD's is "clueless". WMD's was the selling point that used to convince some of the others in the administration and to get media support for the war. Dick Cheney is responsible for that....and for tainting the careers of some very good people....namely Colin Powell and Condi Rice.
    1000%

    And if anyone at all should have seen thru the "lies", it was Bill and Hillary. They both supported the war 100% (but in Bill's case only on the condition of regime change!)

    That should really be the end of it. Left-wing heroes Bill and Hillary would have done the same thing as W (and that really doesn't, nor is it intended to, prop-up W)
  • HitsRus
    ^^^^

    You can say what you want about that administration...call them liars, chickenhawks...whatever. But they were not completely inept. Rightly or wrongly, they used their power effectively. Even when Rumsfield bungled the post-war initially, they were able to right the ship, re-establish authority, and when they left office, the situation was under control.

    When Clint Eastwood talked about an 'empty chair' at the RNC, I didn't really get it completely. But Clint was spot on. Look at the utter failure of leadership...of the absolute abdication of American influence and power in world politics and in crisis situations....Libya, Syria, Iran, Benghazi, Ukraine, ...and now Iraq. Anybody want to guess what Afghanstan will look like in 2016?
  • Mohican00
    HitsRus;1628510 wrote:they were able to right the ship, re-establish authority, and when they left office, the situation was under control
    I do not see how creating a power vacuum righted the ship. Seems the best course would have been to never go there in the first place.
  • pmoney25
    HitsRus;1628510 wrote:^^^^

    Anybody want to guess what Afghanstan will look like in 2016?
    I'm going to go out on a limb and say it will probably look like it had for the last couple thousand years...... A complete shithole
  • HitsRus
    I do not see how creating a power vacuum righted the ship
    There was no power vaccuum when our troops were there. The vaccuum was created when we left.
    Seems the best course would have been to never go there in the first place.
    That might be true, but then we don't know what might have happened if we had never gone. The point is, that we were there, and necessarily to follow a course that had a chance for success.

    I am not saying that the previous administration was great or didn't make mistakes or errors....

    To use a baseball analogy, there are two types of errors....errors of "commission" and errors of "omission"...
    Errors of commission usually show up in the box score, and are the result of trying to make a play but failing.
    Errors of Omission don't usually show up in the box score and are a result of negligence, lack of awareness and preparedness. Errors of omission are often more damaging, and are 'worse' because you never gave yourself a chance.
    I think the past two administrations are examples of both.
  • rydawg5
    [QUOTE=HitsRus;1628524

    That might be true, but then we don't know what might have happened if we had never gone. .[/QUOTE]

    What the fuck are you talking about?

    Follow a course for success? Success in what? Look.. there are 200 "battles" the US could choose to intervene in RIGHT NOW. We don't. With your logic we should intervene in everyone because "what would happen if we hadn't gone?" logic.

    However, that actually ISNT your logic. The only reason you are even putting up a defense is to defend a republican talking point.

    That's ashame.
  • gut
    Iraq was an opportunity that 50+ years of failed Mid East policy hadn't presented. Simple as that.

    The war was a "success". The occupation was an inept botching of epic proportions. For two otherwise BAD presidents there was an opportunity here for greatness. It was pissed away.

    Nothing more to be said. Obama came in with what baseball players call a "fat pitch" on multiple fronts to hit it out of the park. He whiffed. Repeatedly. Obama is the most inept POTUS we've had in 100+ years. If he ever had an idea, he'd be totally incapable of executing it.
  • Mohican00
    HitsRus;1628524 wrote:There was no power vaccuum when our troops were there. The vaccuum was created when we left.
    Well no shit. Let's send them back
  • Mohican00
    gut;1628535 wrote:Nothing more to be said. Obama came in with what baseball players call a "fat pitch" on multiple fronts to hit it out of the park. He whiffed. Repeatedly. Obama is the most inept POTUS we've had in 100+ years. If he ever had an idea, he'd be totally incapable of executing it.
    What exactly did he whiff on? The odds of success from the situation he inherited were minimal. And I'm sure if you have a better suggestion on what should be done write him a fucking letter.

    Authoritarian regime, while shit, was the only thing holding that area of the world together. Now we have a Sunni sect running amok between Iraq and Syria as sectarian war is the only reasonable conclusion to be drawn from occupying Iraq.

    baseball analogies....ffs
  • HitsRus
    What exactly did he whiff on? The odds of success from the situation he inherited were minimal. And I'm sure if you have a better suggestion on what should be done write him a fucking letter.
    Seriously dude? The heavy work was already done. All he had to do was manage it and not neglect it.

    You don't like baseball analogies... let's try this.

    You (your country) decides to plant a garden....You plow it, plant your seeds (of democracy), and clear out all the weeds.
    Now once that is done, it's easy to keep the weeds down with minimal work so your plants can grow and take root. But if you neglect it, the weeds come back, and when they come back they take over fast and now you have a mess and your plants are stifled or dead.

    That's what happened here. Now I'm not talking or debating whether or not the 'garden' should have been put in in the first place. That decision is a decade plus old and GWB is 6 years in the rear view mirror. I'm talking about how it has been handled since....and the results have not been pretty. How could it have been handled differently? That is what the president's job is, that is what his State Departments job is....and backed if necessary, by the credible threat of application of force, to apply leverage to a situation such that the outcome is in our national interest. To that, this administration has been woefully inadequate and inept.

    Power vacuum? Of course there is a power vacuum.....you have the major world power in full retreat. Others (especially those that are unfriendly to us) are going to move in and flourish. That's the way the world operates. LOL if you think differently.

    there are 200 "battles" the US could choose to intervene in RIGHT NOW. We don't. With your logic we should intervene in everyone because "what would happen if we hadn't gone?" logic.
    That's the job of our leaders to make those decisions based upon the national interest and backed up (hopefully) by good information...when to intervene, when to get involved. It does take leadership skills.

    ...and please..stop it with the "logic" stuff. I've seen that thrown around much too much on this site by people who don't really know what it is. Moreover, if you think that "logic" is going to solve the world's political problems....LOL. In this area you deal more with emotions....."Logic" only comes into play when you are staring at an armed force that's bigger than yours. :D