Let's contrast and compare...
They complain that the absolute certainty of WMD's was not there so there was no reason to make an action.
These same people oppose drilling in the Alaskan wilderness because someday something bad might happen.
The pattern seem to suggest they are a bunch pissy little bitch monkeys.
Has anyone pointed this out to them?

hahahahaha

Always a great read to start my boring day at work.

I love the rage. I couldn't have said it better myself!

Although, just one thing:

"why don't you just go the extra mile and join al Qaeda"

I'm sure in many cases it'd be much less than a mile...?

Now, now, let's ease up on the cuss-o-matic accelerator, please? I think we can all agree that the whiners are in need of a "talkin' to" as we used to call it back in the South, but no use trying to impress a donkey with your fluency in French. How about we just immediately let the whiners "inspect" any part of Iraq or Afghanistan that isn't sufficiently pro-American yet? And if they happen to miss the bus back to the base, and get left in a town of remarkably ungrateful locals, who agree with them about American Imperial Hegemony, they can discuss their mutual hatred of our country until pigs fly. Oh, wait, there aren't many pigs in Afghanistan or Iraq. So they'll just have to enjoy the local hospitality, (much like Ned Beatty in Deliverance). See, now I've suggested the forced sodomizing of high government officials by anti-US terrorists, without once cussing. Darn it to heck.

Wow! Frank! That scathing and sizzling tongue lashing impressed even the likes of me!

I think I love you.

Frank J for Pres!

Has His Imperial Highness, Misha I, offered a guest editorial?

Daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn!

Don't sugar-coat it Frank, tell us how you really feel. ~_^

Oh, and I second the 'Frank for Prez' motion!

Ah, now if only the Prez would hire Frank as one of his advisors, we could start seeing more of this and less of this whole "being nice to liberal so-and-so's" kick that Bush seems to be on lately. Well I can dream, can't I?

[email withheld to avoid flames]

Well, speaking for the apparent liberal minority that reads IMAO, I'd have to say that Frank's not going to impress anyone on this side of the aisle with such blather (though I really laughed at the bit about the rented mule).

Nobody will argue that something "good" was done in Iraq this year. But at issue are three things:

1. The hysteria for war in Iraq was fed by misleading information. There's no two ways about it: until WMD's appear, our prez is pretty much a big fat liar.

2. It doesn't matter whether our prez is standing on an aircraft carrier, saying "major fighting has ceased," there's still soldiers dying, and a determined minority in Iraq that has adopted guerrilla tactics to start to wear us down. How much longer does the US have the stomach to hang in there? My guess is that this will come back to haunt our prez in 2004.

3. We've removed a terrible dictator, but what have we replaced him with? I've heard interviews with Iraqis that claim, "At least with Saddam, the lights were on" and the like. The new Iraq is going to be literally years in the making, and it is absolutely a crap shoot as to how it will ultimately turn out. (Personally, I'm hoping it's not another Somalia, as that would be a true shame).

Anyhow, loved the post Frank, and I appreciate the opportunity to voice a dissenting opinion.

roq

RoQ

I could go on and on about how your ideas are contradictory to what's really happening how your ideas of Bush make you look ignorant, but I'll sum it up in one statement. Do you even watch the news? And I mean the real news, not the Democratic Underground's two cents.

And I third Frank for President

To anyone who automatically thinks I'm an idiot:

Please tell me where to go to see the news, as you say. I honestly, solemnly want to know. It's just that I'm anxious to see where all of you guys get such outrageous attitudes.

FWIW, I wasn't expecting sympathy or a groundswell of "Gee RoQ, you're right" responses. I certainly didn't show up here to whip it out and piss on any conservative weenie roast. I just thought it'd be worth letting you folks know that are liberally-minded types that read stuff like IMAO and like it.

roq

1. How is Bush a liar if he doesn't find WMD's? Whether he find them or not doesn't mean they were there or not.

2. They are using guerilla tatics, but the point is whether that will wear us down (we flee with our tail between our legs and invite more attacks) or we put an end to it.

3. At least he made the trains run on time? Right now, by far, the Iraqis want us in Iraq. Saddam was brutal beyond your imagination, and it is up to us to make sure they have a better government. You pose a problem, but you haven't said we failed at it or are going to.

Roq,

This whole argument on how Bush is a lied is B*llSh*T. I mean who really cares. A dictator is in power killing hundreds of thousands of people and we finally had somebody with enough guts to go in and stop him. On the way they found some intelligence that could have gone either way they rolled the dice and lost. Oh well... We should send Saddam a 10,000 pound apology letter when we locate him.

And as far as the replacment for Saddam goes your argument is equivelent to stating that we should not have gone after Hitler because we're worried about how to replace him. Who cares.. IF it does not turn out right we will bomb the replacement too.

Mike D

[Jesus-H-Christ in a jumped-up chariot, this is a long comment, and likely to piss a lot of your readers off. Oh well :)]

Frank, you're absolutely right. Whether or not WMD's are found doesn't mean they were never there, but it introduces doubts. The old regime had plenty of time (years!) to devise and construct all manner of ways to hide and conceal such weapons. Is it going to take the same amount of time to find them?

I have to say that I'm desperately anxious to see WMD's found, as it makes me *feel* better about the fact that it was a primary selling point for going there in the first place. I don't like feeling good that Saddam is ousted (even though I do), because that's something that George Sr. should have done a long, long time ago. It's an incidental consequence of us being in Iraq, not the primary purpose.

I didn't comment in order to say "we have failed" or "we are going to fail" (quite the contrary, I sincerely hope we succeed in the stated mission). But it's assinine to state that we're there to let the Iraqis decide what kind of government they want to have, and then mumble out the side of our collective mouth to the effect, "as long as it's a pro-American democracy".

I don't want the mission to last a day longer than it has to, I just think it's going to last longer than our current president will hold power. Then what? If (egad) he's replaced by a liberal candidate, will that leave Iraq pretty much in the lurch?

Just food for thought. BTW, I really enjoy your site, despite it's rather right-leaning tendencies ;) And I promise, no more of these comments from me. I submit myself to the flogging I'm likely to get from your readers.

roq

ROQ, Mr.. Bush is in the uneviable position of being resposible. The critics are not. The critics can make charges of lies, the President has to worry about divulging intelligence methods and sources, he cannot refute them.
The critics get to have it both ways, they criticise for failling to 'connect the dots' of 9/11 and then criticise the Administration for acting too hastily to 'connect the dots' on Iraq.
Whats worse, most of the critics used the exact same rationel in 1998 when Mr. Cinton bombed Iraq, up to and including 'regime change'. The only difference is that Mr. Bush followed through. So, Dachle, for instance, supported regime change in 1998, voted for it in 1998 and 2002 and is now against it. Was he lying then or is he lying now?
Mr. Bush cannot lay his cards faceup on the table, there are too many things at risk. The failure, so far, to find the WMDs (that every nation believes he had) is troubling. Not because I think they didn't exist, but because our failure to find them means that they are still out there. In '91 Hussein moved most of his airplanes to Iran. I believe he did the same thing with his chemical and biological weapons, moved them to a neighboring country. This incessant carping is dangerous in the extreme. When our guys finally get a handle on where they went, and they will, this carping may prevent us from going after them.
The Left is gambling on the idea that they won't be used, their attaining temporary political advantage is more important than the risk to the American people. I do not agree, they're risking my children's lives. That's not an acceptable gamble.

[Okay, I lied. Just one more comment]

Mike,

If President Bush had come out and said, "we're going in there to take out Saddam. Screw everything else, if you don't like it, kiss my round brown," then at least I could respect that he accomplished what he said out to do.

Since his main argument to try and convince the international community (you know, all those annoying *other* countries on the planet) as well as those of us at home about WMD-this and uranium-that, I feel like we've been out-and-out lied to. It's the eternal "Where's the Beef" question.

Peter,

Very thoughtful comment. I actually like and agree with your logic. :)

[Okay, *NOW* I'm done commenting. Flog away]

roq

Roq,
The primary selling point was that Saddam had not followed the treaty he signed ending the war and all the UN resolutions.
I'm curious, do you believe that Saddam got rid of all the weapons the UN, Russia, China, France, Syria (Syria!), Germany, the US and others said he had and just forgot to tell anybody?
Being afraid of the future is no reason to keep the status quo.
Liberals (not Democrats) used to be about change and making people's lives better, now they are about stasis and hate for George W. Bush.

So.. if I'm reading you right, ROQ, your beef is not with the intent nor the results, really, but with the diplomacy game that France and company refused to play nice in, and you would have preferred a more straight-talking 'kiss my rear if you don't want to do things right' attitude?

Perhaps reading some Denbeste (http://denbeste.nu) would help... he's written some long posts recently which include explanations (from his perspective) as to why we couldn't just come out and say, "We're cleaning up our messes, and Saddam, you're next" back in, say, January of 2002.

Please excuse me, but:

The decision to use force against Iraq was debated in the US Congress (Sept/Oct 2002??), and a majority voted to use force. All reasons were covered in the debate, and many Democrats that voted "aye" have reversed themselves to pander to the Left. Please don't insult us by saying that the 16 words were the entire reason for going to war.

Phil,

Two words... "THANK" "YOU"!
...thought I was the only one that realized this little point.
As to the flip-flopping by the Dems: Is it just me, or does anyone else have a hard time understanding a group of people (and individuals) that have so little in the way of personal beliefs, that they're willing to change they're loyalties and assertions (seemingly at the drop-of-a-hat) for perceived personal political advancement instead of thinking of the nation and its needs first?
I've met used-car dealers with more credibilty and honor!

Pro Patria Vigilans

What most people neglect to take into account was that it's always been on Saddam's head to prove that his weapons were destoyed. Not that we have to prove he still has them. It's well documented that he had them.

http://radio.weblogs.com/0126471/2003/07/22.html#a86

Why it matters.

Ooh-f----ing-rah!

Beats caffeine all to hell.

Thanks, Frank, I needed that.

Roq

Where's the beef? Where have I heard that before??? Oh yeah Walter Mondale said it while Reagan was kicking his ass.

I find this hard to debate with you because your issue is not with the war or the facts but with who is in charge and that to me is un-american... Fuck doing what is right he misspoke!!! That is totally ridiculous and those annoying *other* countries are sitting back cheering on the liberals while secretly laughing at there insecurity and eagerness to please.

When it comes down to it I feel that all of this debate about this 'intelligence blunder' is all sour grapes. Bush did something right everyone should just shut the F*ck up and give the man his props.

Just wanted to point out that Gulf War I never really ended. It was a truce. (Likewise, the Korean War [even Clinton finally allowed as how it was not a 'police action'] has not ended. We're in a truce.) The continuance of the truce was contingent on Saddam meeting certain conditions. Those conditions went unfufilled for 12 years. At that point, the current President Bush mobilized the American people and the overwhelming majority of the Congress to finally finish the Gulf War.

We did not need reasons to "go to war", we were already AT war, just in a negotiated pause. Additionally, the only hysteria I noticed was from those who violently resisted admitting that the truce conditions were not being met, and that resumption of active hostilities was the solution. Calling the people you oppose hysterical is ad hominem.

Just sayin', ya know.

Yeah, what Frank said!

Damn sweet. I'm speechless, and the almost never happens.

Yeah, what Frank said!

Damn sweet. I'm speechless, and the almost never happens.

You forgot to introduce Buck to the Joint Session.

Roq:

At the risk of being excommunicated by Frank for refering to another blog in this hallowed space, Steven Den Beste lays it out really nice here. SDB is trying for a Bill Whittle award with this one, but, like Mr. Whittle, it is well worth the read.

Don't kill me Frank - at least I didn't link to the puppy blender. Oops.

Essentially - the WMD issue was one of the diplomatic reasons for going into Iraq. The real reason is that it was just the right thing to do, and it was the right time (in the US and for the US) to do it.

I never needed WMD to justify taking out that bastard. If that was what it took to get the American people on board with it, then so be it.

If I meet anyone, ANYONE defending the Iraqi regime, with all it's blood-soaked basements, electrodes, industrial shredders, children's cemeteries and untold acres of unmarked graves, I will, so help me God, shoot that paper-hanging son of a bitch with my own ivory-handled revolvers.

Has anyone paid attention to the fact that what he said in those 16 words WAS true? He said:
"The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa." The British... NOT us. What is untrue, misleading, or anything similar about that? Am I missing something? He mentioned the intelligence findings of another country, he didn't claim personal knowledge.

Anyway, that's enough comments from me.

One last comment. In the whole long and agonizing debate, lasting 14 months, Mr. Bush did not say that the Hussuen Regime was an immanent danger. That was the whole damned argument. The antiwar crowd said we should not go to war because Saddam wasn't an immediate threat. The pro war crowd said that we could not afford to wait until he was.
Somehow, aided and abetted by the mainstream media, the aintiwar crowd has stood this on it's head. In order to be able to say 'Bush Lied And People Died' the Left is lying about the reasons for the war. The Left said that Saddam wasn't an immediate danger, the Right said, that's right, we don't want to wait until he is. There was a vote on those premises, the let's wait crowd lost. Now they're lying about it.

"try and convince ... those of us at home about WMD-this and uranium-that"

Speak for yourself. The biggest problem in the differentiation of views between the conservatives and the asshatted liberals on justification for the war is that we didn't need any convincing. I wasn't sitting at home in front of the TV thinking, "Come on, George, convince me that we need to go to war.". I, and many others like myself (although I hesitate at generalizing to cover all conservatives) didn't *need* convincing. The leftist tinfoil hatters and "those annoying *other* countries on the planet" as you so charmingly put it are the ones who needed convincing. I could have given a tin shit less is we found WMD, and until the football-f*cking monkeys in the press started gibbering about the uranium line from the SOTU address, I had completely forgotten about it. It was that inconsequential.

The bastard had to go. Period. There a multitude of reasons, pick any handful you like, but it needed to be done, and it has.

You may consider yourself lied to; I consider you self-deluded.

The Daily Howler (http://www.imao.us/), no fan of Bush, from June 17 on takes apart the sixteen-words crap with great vigor, and exhorts his readers (Dems and other bashers) to look at the facts rather than the spin. He included some cites I had not seen before, too.

BTW, Congress had given POTUS war powers in October, well before SOTUS. In the Senate, unanimously.

er, um...
http://www.dailyhowler.com/
Sorry...

I laughed 'til I puked, but I went to the head (on the poop deck) to do it. There's really no sense in talkin' 'straight' with the 'MentalGiants' of the left, because, like Moby, they will continue to spew out the blowhole until beachin' themselves on the Rocky Shore of Reality. Oh ya, BTW, Methinks Frank 'hoisted' the wee bit of a rented mule line, from Mr. Majority in the House, Tom Delay. Good line, using heavyweight tackle, but the hook coulda used some of that thar 'BlatantBait' to snag the Leviathan known as the DemoDerbyBottomDwellers... In 'plainspeak' Frank, they're f**kin' Socialist Carp. Get my drift thar, Sailors?

Frank, loved the post. It gave me a much needed laugh. Although roq was much nicer than most liberals i've met, he still should go stuff himself. What did people expect? Follow the signs to the wmd's sitting in the middle of a desert? No! they are going to be uber-hidden uber-well.
Love the site Frank, visit it on a daily basis.

Check your http://nz.com.ua

Check your http://nz.com.ua

Thanks for great info

Open your mind - http://eldorado.com.ua

Thanks for great site

Thanks for great site

Open your mind - http://eldorado.com.ua

I like your site :) have a nice day!