Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Saturday, January 11, 2020

President Trump ordered the U.S. military to invade a then-friendly country without the knowledge or consent of its government and assassinate a visiting foreign government official. The victim was the head of Iran's military and intelligence. The formerly friendly country is Iraq.

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

We are not at war with Iran. Iranian self defense is not our biziness. America keeps arrogating itself into other regions and cultures. Soliemani,like it or not,was a hero to many in the region.He was a freedom fighter to them,not a terrorist.He was also a master of minimally lethal warfare and a great patriot to his Co-religonists and countrymen.Why do so many Americans fail to see that other nation's have interests and ideals that we don't understand and that is ok.

#1 | Posted by Effeteposer at 2020-01-11 03:18 PM | Reply

Did Obama have the right to kill Gaddafi?

#2 | Posted by visitor_ at 2020-01-11 04:10 PM | Reply

Too bad there wasn't enough of Soliemani's carcass left intact to knife rate him. That would be LOL-worthy.
-Hillary Clinton

#3 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2020-01-11 04:17 PM | Reply

Rape, not rate.

#4 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2020-01-11 04:18 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Awww look Obama and Hillary deflections.

Shocking.

#5 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-11 05:48 PM | Reply

Sorry, I forgot that historical precedence is no longer relevant because Orange Man Bad.

#6 | Posted by visitor_ at 2020-01-11 06:25 PM | Reply

And Obama had no right to suspend habeas corpus and kill an American Taliban. Yet the left not only was silent then, they defended Obama for doing so. What a difference a single letter in the alphabet (D or R) makes in the logical thought process of some people.

#7 | Posted by goatman at 2020-01-11 06:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Obama didn't kill Gadhafi

#8 | Posted by truthhurts at 2020-01-11 06:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Awww look Obama and Hillary deflections.
Shocking.

#5 | POSTED BY JPW "

Translation:

"Ignore Obama suspending one of the most sacred principles of the Constitution, 'habeus corpus' [a concept so important and ingrained in the Constitution that it is applied to almost every Bill of Rights amendment and even later ones, notably the 14th] and focus on the killing the general of a terrorist regime to whom it doesn't apply".

#9 | Posted by goatman at 2020-01-11 06:50 PM | Reply

"Obama didn't kill Gadhafi

#8 | POSTED BY TRUTHHURTS "

LOL

I remember quite clearly the lefties giving Hillary and Obama credit for his capture, not NATO. You cannot deny this. We all saw it.

Funny how history is rewritten to suit the current narrative.

#10 | Posted by goatman at 2020-01-11 06:59 PM | Reply

Advertisement

Advertisement

Translation:

Let's all ignore Trump's immediate predecessor and SOS and pretend history began on Jan. 20, 2017. No need for traditional tools of logic and argumentation: compare and contrast.

Of course, if Obama/Clinton was so awesome, why would Democrats object to compare and contrast?

#11 | Posted by nullifidian at 2020-01-11 07:02 PM | Reply

So, Laura, on what side were you when Obama ignored an American citizen's Constitutional right of habeas corpus and killed Anwar al-Awlaki?

Seeing as to how you are driven by blind partisanship, I'm sure you were cool with it while being against Trump killing a general of a terrorist regime.

Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, Laura.

#12 | Posted by goatman at 2020-01-11 07:12 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Sorry, I forgot that historical precedence is no longer relevant because Orange Man Bad.

#6 | Posted by visitor_

What precedence?

What high ranking military officer from a country we are not currently at war with did Obama hit with a drone strike?

I didn't and don't like the amount of drone strikes he conducted, but none of them were officials/officers of countries were weren't at war with.

If you want to talk about precedence, lets talk about that precedence. The US used to at least do it on the DL via the CIA...

#13 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-11 08:30 PM | Reply

and pretend history began on Jan. 20, 2017.

Wait. You mean like you schitheaps do whenever you crow about the economy?

Jesus Christ you're a self unaware worthless sack of schit.

#14 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-11 08:31 PM | Reply

Wait. You mean like you schitheaps do whenever you crow about the economy?

"Well, how exactly are you going to do that? What exactly are you going to do? There's no answer to it," Obama said.

"He just says, 'Well, I'm going to negotiate a better deal.' Well, what, how exactly are you going to negotiate that? What magic wand do you have? And usually the answer is, he doesn't have an answer."

From Obama's perspective, and probably yours at the time ... nothing would improve, nothing Trump could do to improve the economy.

Well here we are ....

So yeah ... we can crow all we want...

#15 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-11 09:18 PM | Reply

What precedence?
What high ranking military officer from a country we are not currently at war with did Obama hit with a drone strike?

Col Gaddafi killed: convoy bombed by drone flown by pilot in Las Vegas
Nato forces designated Qaddafi as a military target after the former Libyan leader's forces started firing on civilians as they tried to escape Sirte in a convoy of up to 100 vehicles.

It is understood that RAF Tornados were patrolling over Sirte at the time of the escape attempt but were not directly involved in the operation.

Qaddafi had been under surveillance by Nato forces for the past week after an intelligence breakthrough allowed them to pinpoint his location.

An American drone and an array of Nato eavesdropping aircraft had been trained on his Sirte stronghold to ensure he could not escape ...
www.telegraph.co.uk

"we came we saw he died" ....

What threat was Libya to the US? Certainly Iran is more of a "threat" than Qaddafi ever was.

#16 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-11 09:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I support the assassination of world leaders. Keep it up everyone.

#17 | Posted by bored at 2020-01-12 12:48 AM | Reply

From Obama's perspective, and probably yours at the time ... nothing would improve, nothing Trump could do to improve the economy.

Well here we are ....

So yeah ... we can crow all we want...

#15 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Way to take a quote out of context...

He was talking very specifically about manufacturing jobs.

Which, if you look at historical trends, hasn't come back.

Unemployment and stock market continued on trend line that was in the data since 2010ish.

Other than a few blips in GDP, largely caused by a reckless tax cut, that's right where it was under Obama. The same place you guys mocked and derided.

BTW your post is great in showing how idiotic the average person is, thinking there's a "we" in Trump.

#18 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-12 03:34 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Angry little man because Trump did not nominate him to the Supreme Court.

#19 | Posted by sones at 2020-01-12 10:39 AM | Reply

#16 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Our resident imbecile POS sharts out another ignorant inference that can be debunked with one simple search:

Muammar Gaddafi, the deposed leader of Libya, was captured and killed on 20 October 2011 during the Battle of Sirte. Gaddafi was found hiding in a culvert west of Sirte and captured by National Transitional Council forces. He was killed shortly afterwards. The NTC initially claimed he died from injuries sustained in a firefight when loyalist forces attempted to free him, although a graphic video of his last moments show rebel fighters beating him and one of them sodomizing him with a bayonet[2] before he was shot several times as he pleaded for his life.[3]

en.wikipedia.org

The amount of false or intentionally misleading information spewed out by Matress is unknowable. Just assume everything that he says is a lie and you'd be right much more than you'd ever be wrong.

#20 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-01-12 10:55 AM | Reply

Tweets by Democrat presidential candidates supporting Iranian protesters today:

Joe Biden: ZERO

Elizabeth Warren: ZERO

Bernie Sanders: ZERO

Tulsi Gabbard: ZERO

Mike Bloomberg: ZERO

Amy Klobuchar: ZERO

Cory Booker: ZERO

Pete Buttigieg: ZERO

Why is that?
6:28 PM - 11 Jan 2020

#21 | Posted by nullifidian at 2020-01-12 10:58 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Very disingenuous posting by Tony Copy-N-Paste. Tony, you are deliberately lying.

#22 | Posted by visitor_ at 2020-01-12 11:06 AM | Reply

#20 | POSTED BY TONYROMA

Nice ... did you read the article NO, you didn't even click the link to see the subtitle ....

Col Muammar Gaddafi's convoy was bombed by an American Predator drone and then attacked by French jets before the deposed dictator was killed by rebel fighters, defence sources disclosed.

Americans targeted Gaddafi ....... they missed ..... like everything else Obama did.

#23 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-12 11:10 AM | Reply

"Why is that?"

Kamala Harris called. She wants her Twitter shades back.

#24 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-01-12 11:11 AM | Reply

#22 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Its known as a contextomy.

Tehran Tony has been upset since Feb 2017 when he and Etal made the dubious claim the FBI wouldn't fake/lie to FISA courts, because they would get in trouble.

#25 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-12 11:12 AM | Reply

I read the article imbecile. The only reason Gaddifi's name was brought up was this:

Did Obama have the right to kill Gaddafi?

#2 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

Obama DID NOT KILL Gaddafi. You INFERRED that NATO's (which Obama does not command) drone strike, killed him, just like your buddy Visitor. Perhaps YOU should learn to read:
According to their statement, NATO was not aware at the time of the strike that Gaddafi was in the convoy. NATO stated that, in accordance with United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973, it does not target individuals, but only military assets that pose a threat. NATO later learned "from open sources and Allied intelligence" that Gaddafi was in the convoy and that the strike likely contributed to his capture.[13]
Both of you can go f-ellate each other as far as I care. That's all either of you are good for.

#26 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-01-12 11:23 AM | Reply

You're posts are intentionally misleading. You quote sections of articles and attempt to appear objective when you are clearly not.

#27 | Posted by visitor_ at 2020-01-12 11:31 AM | Reply

Trump didn't kill Soleimani. Who believes Trump can fly a drone?

#28 | Posted by visitor_ at 2020-01-12 11:33 AM | Reply

You're posts are intentionally misleading. You quote sections of articles and attempt to appear objective when you are clearly not.

I'm seriously curious how I can "mislead" by posting factual information from sources outside myself.

Did you just post that "Did Obama have the right to kill Gaddafi?"

Isn't that a bald-faced lie, since NATO was in charge of the operation that ultimately led to his capture and execution? What is misleading about that?

#29 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-01-12 11:34 AM | Reply

#28 | POSTED BY VISITOR

Now you're just being stupid like Mattress. NATO is not Obama, and Trump ordered US forces to target Soleimani, not NATO.

Is your brain unable to understand the differences here?

#30 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-01-12 11:36 AM | Reply

Are really trying to put forth that NATO actions are separate from the US? Do you believe that's how the rest of the world sees it?

#31 | Posted by visitor_ at 2020-01-12 11:44 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

That's not how Obama saw it when he took credit for it.

#32 | Posted by visitor_ at 2020-01-12 11:45 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Are really trying to put forth that NATO actions are separate from the US? Do you believe that's how the rest of the world sees it?

Let me answer your question with a couple other questions.

Why do you think Trump keeps threatening to leave NATO if it is simply just an extension of the US military?

No one is denying that the US President has a heavy influence on NATO policy, but on specific tactical actions such as this, there is no evidence showing that Obama was behind the specific orders and actions taken at that time.

That's not how Obama saw it when he took credit for it.

You are repeating the exagerations uttered by Trump's spokesperson Hogan Gidley. Here is the factual response:

Obama's former National Security Council spokesman Tommy Vietor quickly replied to Gidley. Gaddafi was killed by Libyan rebel forces in 2011. His final moments were captured on video, showing him to be surrounded by a mob of rebels.

Under the Obama administration, the U.S. played mostly a supporting role in NATO military operations regarding Libya, but the White House did not have a direct role in his death.

Vietor pointed this out Gidley, saying that Gaddafi "was killed by members of the [Libya's National Transitional Council] - not by US forces."

Soleimani was killed by the direct order of Donald Trump through the use of the US military. The two are not the same.

#33 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-01-12 12:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

So are you claiming a drone controlled by someone in Las Vegas Nevada (US) against Gaddafi's convoy is outside of the control of the US President? Preposterous.

#34 | Posted by visitor_ at 2020-01-12 12:29 PM | Reply

Americans targeted Gaddafi ....... they missed ..... like everything else Obama did.

#23 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Fixed the GOP trashed economy.
Dramatically slowed medical cost inflation.
Made it possible for millions to get medical insurance and care.

That's definitely three strikes right there.

#35 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-12 12:39 PM | Reply

You're posts are intentionally misleading. You quote sections of articles and attempt to appear objective when you are clearly not.

#27 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

LOL another schitheap righty projecting like crazy.

#36 | Posted by jpw at 2020-01-12 12:41 PM | Reply

#34

I'm not an expert on US military and it's direct involvement and coordination with NATO, but the short answer has already been shown to you in quoted context above.

There is a bold line difference between the US military taking orders through the domestic chain of command and US military assets under the control of NATO command.

Obama Sends Armed Drones to Help NATO in Libya War

President Obama has authorized the use of armed Predator drones to attack Libya government forces fighting the rebellion against Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi as NATO struggles to regain momentum since taking command of the operation from the United States.

Other NATO nations do not fly armed Predators, although they have unarmed versions for reconnaissance and targeting purposes, and the decision by Mr. Obama to add these weapons to the Libya operation was viewed as another example of the struggle to fill gaps in NATO's capability to carry out a complicated, extended combat mission with significant American support.

Those gaps have become more apparent as the United States transferred command of the Libya operation to NATO and stepped back to a supporting role.

You, among others always try to infer that showing my sources is somehow untoward. I think just the opposite. No one cares what you think about anything as matters of fact unless you can back up your assertions with acknowledged details or considered opinions of others far better informed.

If you want to maintain that the US President is the only one who can give US drone personnel orders to strike while under NATO command, then present evidence in support of your notion. I just did in support of what I believe to be the truth.

#37 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-01-12 12:54 PM | Reply

Funny how history is rewritten to suit the current narrative.

#10 | POSTED BY GOATMAN

So stop trying to do that. You do it all the time.

Obama did not kill Gaddafi.

The Libyan people killed Gaddafi.

#38 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-01-12 01:12 PM | Reply

More bad news for leftists. Let the tears flow.

"High-level pro-Iran militia commander is assassinated in Iraq by unknown gunmen."

#39 | Posted by nullifidian at 2020-01-12 01:18 PM | Reply

You partisan hacks cannot have it both ways.

People on the left who defended if not outright praised Obama for his drone attacks should not be tearing into Trump for this.

People on the right who support Trump on this should STFU about Obama. I doubt that Napolitano was an Obama supporter.

#40 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-01-12 01:26 PM | Reply

People on the left who defended if not outright praised Obama for his drone attacks should not be tearing into Trump for this.

I don't recall anyone from the left "praising" Obama for drone attacks, it was just the opposite. While most did not take to the streets in opposition, this was one of the most controversial aspects of his presidency.

#41 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-01-12 01:31 PM | Reply

I don't agree that Congress should impeach a president for using powers that they irresponsibly punted on and gave him. They need to rein these powers back in before complaining about another branch of government using them.

#42 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-01-12 01:33 PM | Reply

"partisan hacks cannot have it both ways.

People on the left who defended if not outright praised Obama for his drone attacks should not be tearing into Trump..."

There was no imminent threat. Assassinating the leaders of sovereign nations is a crime. Trump was not authorized by Congress to murder him.

Obama made many mistakes but he did not assassinate the heads of foreign governments that I am aware of.

#43 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-01-12 01:34 PM | Reply

"I don't recall anyone from the left "praising" Obama for drone attacks, it was just the opposite."

I seem to remember posters like Danni doing so, and calling anyone who didn't support it traitors.

#44 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-01-12 01:35 PM | Reply

"While most did not take to the streets in opposition, this was one of the most controversial aspects of his presidency."

Did anyone say it was worth considering impeaching him over it?

#45 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-01-12 01:40 PM | Reply

I seem to remember posters like Danni doing so, and calling anyone who didn't support it traitors.

I'm gonna call BS on that one. Danni has always respected innocent ex vivo human life to the best of my recollections. The universal problem with drone strikes has always been collateral damage not associated with the targets.

You'll have to post something proving your point. It doesn't ring true and I've been here for over 16 years.

#46 | Posted by tonyroma at 2020-01-12 01:40 PM | Reply

Why is that?
6:28 PM - 11 Jan 2020

#21 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

Makes one wonder. Did Trumpy support the protests against Tehran before he went on his assassination of foreign leaders killing spree?

#47 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-01-12 01:46 PM | Reply

"You'll have to post something proving your point."

Sorry, I don't have an obsession with collecting every single stupid thing people write here verbatim, like some people do. I clearly remember the comment, and I would be surprised if no one else does.

#48 | Posted by sentinel at 2020-01-12 01:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"You partisan hacks cannot have it both ways."

They believe otherwise. It's one of the outwardly and obvious symptoms that makes them a partisan hack.

Look at who's arguing with you.
"But but but but....this is different...."

LOL

#49 | Posted by eberly at 2020-01-12 02:07 PM | Reply

But but but but....this is different...."

LOL

#49 | POSTED BY EBERLY

But but but but what about Obama!!?

Morons.

The same morons who talked themselves into the Iraq War by believing their own BS.

How many times will we have to leave that H/hole country?

#50 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-01-12 02:36 PM | Reply

50

Proudly wears the sign.

#51 | Posted by eberly at 2020-01-12 02:43 PM | Reply

The same morons who talked themselves into the Iraq War by believing their own BS.

Wasn't me, I didn't want to go .. but like I stated once you are there "you broke it you bought it" ...

Same with Libya which turned out WAY WAY WAY worse for the people of Libya.
twitter.com

Obama and Hillary cut and run around the globe, Honduras, Libya, Syria ... refugees are still flowing from those areas...

Iraq? Not so much..... why? Because we stayed. Again I don't want to be there, but if do we go I expect we go all in.

#52 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-12 02:57 PM | Reply

Same with Libya which turned out WAY WAY WAY worse for the people of Libya.
#52 | POSTED BY ANDREAMACKRIS

Cue Corky, who will tell us how thankful Libyans are for their fledgling democracy.

#53 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2020-01-12 03:01 PM | Reply

Tweets by Democrat presidential candidates supporting Iranian protesters today:

Last time you posted something like this, i checked their twitter accounts and literally every single person had posted something even though you claimed they didn't.

You aren't even worth verifying anymore. You're a worthless liar.

#54 | Posted by JOE at 2020-01-12 03:02 PM | Reply

It is refreshing to hear that lawyers, regardless of their political affiliations, are standing up for the rule of law. Because, best I can tell AS A LAWYER, there was no legal basis for assassinating a foreign leader in this manner.

#55 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-01-12 03:05 PM | Reply

I doubt that Napolitano was an Obama supporter.

#40 | POSTED BY SENTINEL AT 2020-01-12 01:26 PM | FLAG:

No he wasn't, but he was praised for his opinions on Hillary and her basement server by the same people here who don't want to hear another word out of his mouth. Hell, even I agreed with him about Hillary's unsecured server. I also agree with him on Trumps obstruction of justice and other impeachable actions.

#56 | Posted by lfthndthrds at 2020-01-12 03:48 PM | Reply

Seems to me Judge Nap has come down against Trump a lot lately, almost doing it purposely to be a dissenting opinion on Fox. Regardless, Trump got himself in trouble for not informing the gang of eight of his decision before acting, and not having legit intelligence (what else are we to think) to back it up.

When you plan to assassinate someone without those two things you're going to be questioned, and rightfully so.

#57 | Posted by brass30 at 2020-01-12 07:29 PM | Reply

How about Trump himself? LOL.......he'll probably ad lib that in one of his upcoming rallies.

#58 | Posted by brass30 at 2020-01-12 07:36 PM | Reply

BRASS

What Trump DOESN'T believe in is any branch of government that is co-equal to himself. At the moment he's just demonstrating his hatred of "the establishment", a large part which includes the Constitution, that deprives him of the right to do anything he damn well pleases any time he damn well pleases to do it.

It's a sickness that runs deep in the history of the world's most deranged dictators. It should be apparent to all that this is the direction Trump has in mind for America.


#59 | Posted by Twinpac at 2020-01-13 03:18 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Napolitano Had No Legal Right to open his pie hole. I thought our hero o'bummer declared Soleimani fair game.

#60 | Posted by Sniper at 2020-01-13 11:05 AM | Reply

"I thought our hero o'bummer declared Soleimani fair game."

Obama was beholden to the same pro-Israel lobby that Trump is now kowtowing to and make no mistake, this assassination (and that is exactly what it was), was done to appease them and their supporters.

When you don't make it partisan issue and look at it objectively, it becomes much clearer. Sadly, you are 100% partisan and beholden to the MIC and as a result you are completely blinded.

#61 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2020-01-13 11:11 AM | Reply

Obama was beholden to the same pro-Israel lobby that Trump is now kowtowing to and make no mistake, this assassination (and that is exactly what it was), was done to appease them and their supporters.,

No it wasn't.

When you don't make it partisan issue and look at it objectively, it becomes much clearer.

Partisanship has nothing to do with the fact that the man that ordered the raid on our embassy, killing a contractor, was taken out in the same city as that attack.

They are clearly linked and IMO deserved.

Sadly, you are 100% partisan and beholden to the MIC and as a result you are completely blinded.

how many more boogeymen are we beholden too? Just curious because it seems never ending with you.

#62 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-13 11:25 AM | Reply

What Trump DOESN'T believe in is any branch of government that is co-equal to himself.

This is demonstrably false, he went to the courts to settle the subpoena issue with congress.

Its Nancy that DOESN'T believe any other governmental body is co-equal.

#63 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2020-01-13 11:28 AM | Reply

"No it wasn't."

Obama's administration's actions speak much louder than you words, Karen. But you are an Israel-firster, so you won't admit it anyway.

"Partisanship has nothing to do with the fact that the man that ordered the raid on our embassy, killing a contractor, was taken out in the same city as that attack."

Bush started the Iraq war based on exaggerations and falsehoods. Many Americans died-- many more than Soleimani supposedly killed. So, if you value american lives SOOOO much, when are you gonna make the call to take him out?

Anyway, who knows if Soleimani did or not-- no credible evidence. what is self evident is this-- No Israel lobby, no Iraq war. No Iraq war, no increased Iranian presence in Iraq. No increased presence, no embassy attack. It's simple, really. But not for you, because you will find any excuse to continue foolish military interventionism.

"how many more boogeymen are we beholden too?"

You tell me.

#64 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2020-01-13 11:33 AM | Reply

Again, Liberals trying to make this out to be bad because they weren't the ones who got the win.

"The laws of war permit him to do that, but self-defense -- actually, defense of the country -- only comes into play when the foreign military personnel are physically engaged in killing Americans or are certainly about to do so. "

Actually, considering the target in question already committed the act of being physically engaged to harm Americans and there was no repercussion, there was an imminent threat. It's the same as if there is an armed person who just burgled a house and moved on to another. A newsflash comes out warning local residents to be on guard, lock their doors, etc.. If someone kills him when the guy is nearing another house because he is threatening them, that could be seen as an act of defense. The law is not as prescriptive as this stupid author wants it to be but he has to make sure to try to spin it enough to cater to his fan base (e.g. Libs). Regardless, the guy did harm to us and others and was killed for it. I'm sorry you feel he should be given every chance to be free.

"Bush started the Iraq war based on exaggerations and falsehoods."

Actually, no he didn't. That is you and Liberals spinning it to make sure it implicates the other party instead of accepting it as a failure of the country. There is no evidence that W took us to war over exaggerations and falsehoods. The evidence clearly shows what our intelligence knew at the time. This ended in two ways, either we found what we had evidence of or we didn't. Since we didn't, it means our intelligence was wrong, not exaggerated. We were just wrong. However, considering no one has still been able to find the WMDs that Saddam had at the end of the first war except for a cache of expired WMDs, there is still the question as to where they are. If Iraq doesn't have them, someone does. So we need new, better intelligence.

ANY intelligence can be claimed to be exaggerations and falsehoods if you are biased. I have evidence the Bucs are going to win the Superbowl next year. If it doesn't happen, it's not because I exaggerated or lied, it is because I was wrong. That's it. It is only YOU who is spinning it to fit an agenda.

Now, whether we should have gone to war over the intelligence we had is a valid argument. But making a claim that is not proven and has no evidence means you are exaggerating and spreading falsehoods.

#65 | Posted by humtake at 2020-01-13 12:28 PM | Reply

Actually, no he didn't.

You are a liar, Ari Fleischer I mean, Humtake--

web.archive.org

I guess I could post plenty more, but you have no integrity anyway so why bother?

#66 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2020-01-13 12:37 PM | Reply

Even when faced with huge amounts of evidence to the contrary, Humtake will still lie and fake, fake and lie (and bring up football).

At least when Iran is presented with mounds of evidence for their own bad deeds, they fess up.

I guess Iran has more integrity than you or your ------------- Republican cult figures ever will have.

#67 | Posted by NerfHerder at 2020-01-13 12:40 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort