McCain: Wrong, Wrong, Wrong

How very juvenile of you. I post exact quotes from McCain, sourced with dates and links, and your great respons is name calling. They weren't "beliefs" expressed by me. They were QUOTES, EXACT WORD FOR WORD QUOTES, made by John McCain. Maybe you need to cure your own ignorance.

Show us again how intellectually-challenged you are, call me some more names. I can take the heat, and always enjoy watching someone make a fool of themselves. You're really quite amusing as you twist in the wind.

Name calling? No, I accurately assessed the response you gave to my documented evidence, that refuted your unsupportable crap. Let's review...

iraqis_wideweb__470x283,2.jpg

Iraqi's after Saddam was convicted. Apparently not having 'great joy and pleasure in Iraq' after getting 'this gastapo off of their backs'. Huh... seems you are the liar.

Jay Rockefeller, a democrat, chairman of the Select Committee on Intelligence, released this committee report on intel for the Iraq war.

  • Iraq's nuclear weapons program? The president's statements "were generally substantiated by intelligence community estimates."
  • Biological weapons, production capability and those infamous mobile laboratories? The president's statements "were substantiated by intelligence information."
  • Chemical weapons, then? "Substantiated by intelligence information."
  • Weapons of Mass Destruction overall (a separate section of the intelligence committee report)? "Generally substantiated by intelligence information."
  • Delivery vehicles such as ballistic missiles? "Generally substantiated by available intelligence."
  • Unmanned aerial vehicles that could be used to deliver WMDs? "Generally substantiated by intelligence information."
  • Iraq's support for terrorist groups other than al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information."
  • Iraq provided safe haven for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and other terrorists with ties to al-Qaeda "were substantiated by the intelligence assessments,"
  • Iraq's contacts with al-Qaeda "were substantiated by intelligence information."

Oh looky, even your own democrats say you are a liar.... again.

'Bush Lied'? If Only It Were That Simple.


There is no proof that once Iraq itself is stabilized, that it will not have a positive lasting effect in the middle east. We already have very positive feedback from Iraqis there.

Assyditroit.jpg

Apparently non-jubilant Iraqis, celebrating free elections in Iraq, and thanking the US for helping it to come about.

From Bet-Nahrain web site. Check it out to see how unhappy they were at us allowing them free elections.

You lied again.

We did win easily. Saddam's Iraqi forces were decimated and, Bagdad fell in weeks. The Saddam government was wiped out in a month at best. We won that war easy. We didn't count on having to fight with militias backed by Iran and Al Qaeda, but we have mushed them too now with the surge, that worked perfectly.

Liar liar liar. You obamabots are all liars.

Note... each of your pathetic claims were shot down by clear concise documented evidence. Your pathetic response to the documented evidence, was as lame as the original lies you posted.

Only one has even the chance to be valid. That being the claim that once everything is finished, it will bring a new stability to the middle east. This hasn't happened yet, but the job is not yet finished. Yes it may not happen. But saying it hasn't and therefore won't, is like the democrats in 2004 claiming Fannie Mae won't go bankrupt, because it hadn't yet.
 
Werbung:
Your problem is you take them out of context. Andy showed you, and I mentioned before the actual context of the quotes. You have ignored that critical part of the entire equation.

It is akin the Army saying well gosh, we do not need to use tanks in Iraq because they did not work well in Vietnam. The context changes everything, which you continually ignore.

You are trying to compare a quote from 2003, which actually came to pass, we were greeted well before we botched the occupation. Holding up a quote that was true, until new situations that were well out of control of McCain arose, is dubious at best.

In fact, prior to the war starting, an entire company of Iraqis heard gun fire and explosions, which turned out to be test fires, and thought the war had started. They promptly marched across the boarder to a British outpost, and attempted to surrender to the outpost. The war had not yet started, and the Brits were forced to send the soldiers back because they were not ready to accept surrendered troops.

Faced with this information, no one in government is going to assume this will be a hard fight.

No one anticipated the influence of Iran and Al Qaeda, nor the mass chaos of the power vacuum. Maybe they should have, and maybe we could have had better post-war Iraq plans. But it's pointless to play would have, could have, should have games now. We need to finish the remaining provinces, and eliminate the remains of terrorist still operating in northern Iraq. And finely turn over each province as the Iraqi government is able to take back local control, without alerting every terrorist of the exact day we will be leaving, so as to not give them a target to attack.

If we say we're leaving March 3rd, the opposition will lay low and grow their supplies, thus making everyone feel is though the problems are over. Then after we leave, they will start hostilities again. This is exactly what happened in Vietnam. We advertised we were leaving, and wouldn't come back. Then shockingly after we left, they attacked relentlessly until they defeated the nation we fought successfully to protect. Thank you democrats. Have you learned nothing?
 
Werbung:
John McCain is campaigning on his unwavering support for Bush’s needless war in Iraq. He’s even said we should stay there for 100+ years. He’s trying to project the image that he has superior knowledge about this needless war and it’s a cornerstone of his presidential campaign.

But John McCain has a problem. He has a record on Iraq. He has a record he can be, and should be judged by.

John McCain has repeatedly confused Sunni and ****e religious sects, revealing a stunning ignorance for a senator who claims to be the sole possessor of superior knowledge and judgment regarding U.S. involvement in Iraq. Frankly, McCain has an astonishing record of inaccurate assessments and poor predictions about Bush’s needless war in Iraq. From his nonsensical assessment of the security of Baghdad to his assertions of political progress in Iraq, which even the top U.S. commander in that country contradicts, McCain has a damning history of being wrong on Iraq.

McCain said the war in Iraq would be “One of the best things that’s happened to America.” While appearing on NBC’s Meet The Press, McCain said, “We’re going to be all right. We’re going to prevail and we will win and it’ll be one of the best things that’s happened to America and the world in a long time ‘cause it’ll reverberate throughout the Middle East.” (March 3, 2003)

Five years later, 4,000+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent and no “reverberation”, this is “one of the best things that’s happened to America”?

McCain predicted “Great Joy and Pleasure in Iraq”. While appearing on NBC’s Meet The Press, McCain said, “I believe that these people have the same yearnings for freedom and democracy and independence and self-determination that every person on earth does, and once this Gestapo is off of their backs, then I think you will see great joy and pleasure that we were able to free them and that will not come until they are sure that they don’t have Saddam Hussein returning again.” (March 30, 2003)

Five years later, 4,000+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent and where’s the “great joy and pleasure” in Iraq” Instead, we’re battling insurgents, that’s Iraqi citizens, that seem to be annoyed with an invasion and prospect of a 100+ year occupation.

McCain said Bush led with “clarity and did not exaggerate the case for war”. In 2003, McCain praised George W. Bush’s leadership on the Iraq war saying, “I think the president has let with great clarity and I think he’s done a great job leading the country, don’t you all?” And asked if he thought the president exaggerated the case for war, McCain said, “I don’t think so.” (MsNBC Hardball, April 4, 2003 / Fox News July 31, 2003)

Five years later, 4,000+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent, no weapons of mass destruction in 200 known sites, no nuclear threat, no clear and present danger to America, in fact 100% of Bush’s claims used as sole justification for starting his needless war turned out to 100% false, and McCain says “no exaggeration”.

McCain said that disarming Iraq would, “Significantly Improve the Stability of The Region.” In a 2003 New York Times op-ed, McCain wrote, “Many critics suggest that disarming Iraq through regime change would not result in an improved peace. There are risks in this endeavor, to be sure. But no one can plausible argue that ridding the world of Saddam Hussein will not significantly improve the stability of the region and the security of American interests and values. (March 13, 2003)

Five years later, 4000+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent, and no “stability in the region”. We don’t even have “stability in Iraq”. We don’t even have “stability” in Baghdad. We don’t even have “stability” in the Green Zone. Then there’s the issue of Bush’s needless war enhancing Iran’s influence in the region to a point where the Republicans are contemplating starting yet another war they can lose.

McCain predicted “Jubilant Iraqis Would Diminish Anti-American Sentiment in The Middle East.” In the build up to the Iraq war, McCain stated that it is “more likely that antipathy toward the United States in the Islamic world might diminish amid the demonstrations of jubilant Iraqis celebrating the end of a regime that has fee equals in its ruthlessness. (American Conservative Magazine, February 11, 2003)

Five years later, 4,000+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent and no “jubilant Iraqis” The reality is, Bush’s blunder in strategy allowed a civil war to erupt. The fact is, anti-American sentiment in the Middle East has swelled the ranks of al-Qaeda as a great recruiting tool. The fact is, all of our own intelligence agencies are on the record in stating the Iraq war has made America less safe. In the face of this evidence, McCain wants to continue this mistake for 100+ years.

Repeatedly, McCain Claimed The United States Would Win Easily in Iraq. In 2002 and 2003, before the invasion, McCain repeatedly claimed success in Iraq would be easy and minimized potential risks. According to CNN, McCain stated, “Because I know that as successful as I believe we will be, and I believe that the success will be fairly easy, we will still lose some American young men or women.” (March 17, 2003)

Five years later, 4,000+ dead Americans, $3 trillion spent, a civil war in progress, tens of thousands more troops and this is “easy”? It was “easier” and faster to defeat the Germans and Japanese in WW II than to just create order in Iraq. It was so “easy” McCain now thinks we should still be working on it for 100+ years.

When it comes to Iraq, a cornerstone to his bid to become president, John McCain has a record we can view and judge him by. He’s been consistent. He’s been consistently wrong. He’s been wrong, dead wrong. He was wrong then. He’s wrong now. His claims are not subject to spin. They’re documented and reveal the danger of allowing anyone so consistently wrong the opportunity to make the mess he helped create, get worse.

John McCain, who has been consistently wrong, is wrong for America. His own well established record proves that beyond any doubt.
Saddam was paying families of suicide bombers tens of thousands of dollars to blow themselves up in crowds of Jews. Thank God the US took Saddam out.
 
Back
Top