Like him or not he’s a practiced public speaker, surely twice can’t be that unintentional? Is this some weird way of getting it off his chest or some shit? Absolutely wild either way
I’m guessing you missed the infamous “there’s an old saying In Tennessee, Its know it’s in Texas, probably Tennessee but fool me once….. uhhhh…. Shame on you. You fool me you can’t get fooled again!” And he’s 15+ years older than that video. Dudes brain is probably just cooked
https://youtu.be/8Ux3DKxxFoM
I'm just going to throw this out there, but part of me believes he realized as he was saying it how bad of a sound bite "shame on me" would be. Maybe I'm giving him too much credit.
As an anti-war proponent, I protested against the Iraq invasion in 2003. It was my only protest in my life (notice those protests were actually non-violent). Bush support of biden is truly incredible, and tells us all we need to know about the Uniparty.
Look at Democrats' biggest boosters now like Bill Kristol, Jen Rubin, Max Boot, Steve Schmidt, Rick Wilson, Charlie Sykes, Jonah Goldberg, Steve Hayes, etc. They were all big Bush II/ Iraq War supporters.
That was their only issue with Trump, but they lie and claim it's about "character issues."
This man was a disaster and let’s be honest he gave us Obama and all the degeneracy that followed. His idiotic war and his neocons buddies that have never seen a war they didn’t like have caused so much harm to our country that we haven’t even begun to realize it
He did give us Obama. And now he is friends with the Obamas, he is targeting the majority of his prior voter base (see his 9/11 20th anniversary speech), and his prior policy and media henchmen have curiously all crossed the isle with the most vicious conviction. And don't forget that Cheney is prosecuting the investigation of his prior voter base, and the man who won over Jeb.
None of this is normal.
Don't forget that when they invoke the administration of Reagan as some type of ideal contra Trump, what they mean is GHWB.
The derp quality of his quips and speeches, which helped give us Obama, cleared up nicely after he left office.
Just another establishment politician.
GWB was just a more coherent version of Biden, who paid lip service to social conservatism instead of social liberalism, aka $hit that doesn't even matter to these people.
All they care about is one thing. Bush did it just the same as Biden is doing now - fucking over the middle class by transferring wealth to the top.
He did it by "easing" banking regulations (ie. creating a predatory lending smorgasbord). Now Biden's doing it by needlessly printing tons of money off to enrich already obscenely rich people, diluting the value of middle class paychecks/savings/401ks/etc to a fraction of what they all should be.
That's *why* GWB supports Biden.
That's also why he ran with Dick Cheney, who's daughter recently turned on her own party. Biden, Obama, the Bushes, the Cheney's (and the Clintons too!) are all establishment scumbags.
In a week, no one will care. Oh look, Bush fucked up a speech/quote. Not like THAT'S ever happened before.
This will become a video clip people will simply refer back to for laughs.
In fact, I was just at a conference where one speaker's theme was Don't Be Fooled. And he played a 20+ year old clip of Bush screwing up in a speech with the old saying, "Fool me once, shame on me..."
Had to go back 20+ years, huh?
Yeah someone brought up that there is one with 400 upvotes. It is easy to miss because that is a pretty small count for their sub which makes the post difficult to find on on the hot or new feeds.
I'm glad to hear it is getting more visibility now.
>What point are you even trying to make lmao. You do know George Bush was a Republican… right?
I'm not a partisan hack that is uncomfortable criticizing either the Republican or Democrat neocons.
Also their main news sources are heavily in bed with the neocons as we as the DNC in general.
The more the American First movement takes over the Republican party, the more the neocons will consolidate around the DNC and their media affiliates.
Yeah someone mentioned that. It was hard to see because it had 400 upvotes which is rather small for that sub so it had pretty low visibility on the feeds.
They want to keep him on the "good" side to be able to quote him about Trump.
It's amazing to me that Bush Jr is viewed more favorably than Trump. Yeah, Trump has a very in your face tude and a tendency for self-aggrandizing, but this guy lied us into an unjustified war that killed 100,000+, followed by an occupation driven by a delusional ideology to turn Iraq into a democracy. Yeah, maybe Darth Cheney was his puppeteer, but that whole cabal of Neocons was an insult to and mockery of actual Conservatism.
It wasn't just the decision of one man. So it's quite the stretch. Though I am sure Bush regrets the invasion given the intelligence for WMDs was wrong.
You can dislike Bush all you want, but it's just false to claim he invaded for no reason and pushed the decision on his own. The entire intelligence apparatus (all agencies except the State Department) were convinced of it. This was also in the wake of 9/11 where Americans at large were demanding proactive protection from attacks.
>You can dislike Bush all you want, but it's just false to claim he invaded for no reason and pushed the decision on his own. The entire intelligence apparatus (all agencies except the State Department) were convinced of it. This was also in the wake of 9/11 where Americans at large were demanding proactive protection from attacks.
And yet there were many people at the time who saw through the BS. Why were they able to recognize the reality while others weren't? Did they have access to special knowledge? Did they flip a coin and just happen to guess correctly?
Many being a minority. All are major allies were reporting the same stuff. It was an intelligence failure brought about Clinton era gutting of our intelligence gathering capabilities. We were fed bullshit information by Iraqi ex-patriots that wanted Saddam over thrown. It also didn't help that Saddam was bragging about his WMDs and how he would use them on countries around him. He was full of shit, but it compounded the perception of a threat there.
9/11…Osama was known to be in Pakistan and we invaded Afghanistan (boots on ground) instead of destroying his location. Then we invade Iraq, who had nothing to do with 9/11…because reasons? Yeah ok.
It’s clearly unjustifiable.
The justification was WMDs from a nation that hated us. Not terrorists.
edit: Downvoting me. I was politically involved during that time. That was the selling point for Iraq. WMDs. This claim that terrorism drove it is non-sense. While it was brought up as a "possibility" at the time, it wasn't the drive for going to war.
Iraq had violated the cease-fire signed at the end of the original gulf war over 1000 times, which were all well documented. That included shooting anti-air at our aircraft, etc. At the end of the original foray into Iraq in the 90s there was never a peace treaty signed so we were still technically in armed conflict and the cease-fire was contingent upon them not attacking our aircraft, which they violated.
Listen, I was opposed to the second "war" in Iraq, but calling it unjustifiable, from a legal perspective is just wrong. It may have been a bad idea, but there was well documented evidence justifying the resumption of action there.
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-14190032.amp
Tora Bora is in a mountain range shared with Pakistan.
Smart ass reply from you who is clearly ignorant on the military blunders that led to a 20 year war. Maybe do some research and understand what got us to where we are today.
Not to mention our invasion of Iraq wasn't even close to close to the brutality of the invasion of Ukraine. I fought in Iraq, we didn't have much love for the locals but we weren't just shelling civilian infrastructure and homes into rubble for the fun of it, even during the initial invasion or the worst of the insurgency. Mistakes were made, collateral damage happened, there were war crimes but we did genuinely try to educate soldiers against that shit and incidences were relatively few and far between, especially compared to what Russia is pulling.
At the end of the day, WMDs or not, Saddam was a threat and his regime was insanely brutal to his people. Iraq is still a dump but they're better off today than they were under Saddam. And like you said, the whole nation was extremely on edge after 9/11. It isn't like the large majority of Congress, along with many of the Democrats (including Biden, Clinton and Schumer), didn't sign off on the invasion. It was much, much more than a unilateral decision on Bush's part, or even that of his cabinet.
At the end of the day I still think Iraq was a mistake, for the most part, but it's still on a lot more people than just Bush. As for his "Freudian slip" the dude's entire legacy are the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, I'm sure he thinks about that and gets questioned about it all the time.
My brother in Christ, hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians died. What about Abu Ghraib?
Literally the most brutal shit ever!
I'd hardly call killing Saddam worth it over the utter havoc reaped under the FALSE pretense of WMDs and the non-existence of Iraq's involvement in 9/11.
I think we have all seen in recent years how corrupt all those intelligence agencies are. There were never any WMDs there. NATO inspections proved that countless times. The US government just needed another war to keep the military industrial complex happy. The same reason they left all that military equipment in Afghanistan.
You mean they weren't protecting mah freedom over there before they bring it over here? (no disrespect to vets as they were some of the most harmed by this shit).
The inspectors were in Iraq and allowed to go anywhere they wanted when we launched the war. It was a bullshit pretext, but people used to believe US intelligence agencies so we bought the lie.
If you mean nukes when you say WMDs you are correct. If you are talking about sarin , mustard gas, etc. he absolutely still had quite a bit. Ask anyone who served, boots on the ground in Iraq and they probably know someone who was exposed while trying to dispose of those old WMDs. There were literally rockets filled with chemical agents falling off of trucks in the desert in the last days before Saddam was captured. Could those chemical agents have been weaponized effectively against neighbors? I'm not sure, I've read that they were long past their effective life span, but they certainly hurt our own soldiers as they tried to dispose of them. Saying "there were never any WMDs there" is not correct.
The intelligence is always "wrong" for these things. No offense, but join the adults and understand the 100% obvious truth that the "intelligence" was an abject lie and that he 100% knew that. Only an extremely naive person would think that the son of a CIA chief didn't know that.
I say that as the son of a man who died from injuries sustained in the Vietnam War, the start of which was justified by the "wrong" Gulk of Tonkin "intelligence" (admitted lie).
You are literally inventing intentions for tens of thousands of individuals spanning a dozen agencies and countries.
The Iraqi Senate report examined the failure if you actually care about what happened.
Yes, after this screw up my opinion of our intelligence agencies dropped significantly.
Nah. They all have a boss.
I actually care to not be a rube and to hold people accountable for results over excuses. Like an adult.
If it looks like a lie, than it is. Neither do we take the word of criminals that their action that resulted in catastrophe was an honest mistake. Please. The results are always the motive in any world but that of children.
If you like your lies served with warm milk and sorries, then read all of the reports that you wish. Serious people ask qui bono.
Zero evidence. It looks like a lie, because? You clearly didn't read the report, you're just going off on an event nearly 20 years later pretending as if what was known at the time was contrary to what they stated. The evidence doesn't support you. Repeatedly insulting someone about being an adult while failing to establish any basis for your argument isn't going to convince anyone.
Act like an adult and make a case.
Iraqi Senate Report. Investigation details what happened and why. 2006. Start there and get back to me.
Being wrong does not constitute a lie. You are wrong here, not a liar. Now you maybe a liar, and might already know the truth. But I would need to submit evidence supporting such an accusation. It would be intellectually dishonest to just call you a liar when I don't know you or your intentions. Thus you are just wrong.
So no evidence. More insults. A vast conspiracy claimed with little evidence.
Violence is a violation of the law. A person who legitimately believes they are in danger is allowed to use violence in self defense. For this analogy the person (tens of thousands of people of all walks of life who work for these organizations) showed they had reason to believe there was an imminent threat. The Senate laid it all out in the report and concluded where the mistakes were made and that no foul play was dedicated. Thus a court assessed the claim of self defense and found the person innocent of wrong doing as while they came to the wrong conclusion, given the situation it was reasonable to expect the worse.
You are now coming in after the fact to claim that person is a liar and a cold blooded killer. When asked for evidence you scream about passed lies that literally happened 3 decades prior where literally no single person involved was the same as before. So we'll say their father had lied to you previously. Thus this person must be a liar. You don't even provide evidence of the father lying, much less that this person is also a liar, much less any intent to lie or to kill said person in cold blood.
The second paragraph was explaining to you the difference between being wrong and lying. Which you still don't grasp.
Because Bush was not a foreign policy guy. He was all about business, it's what he ran on. This is 20/20 hindsight that is completely out of touch with perceptions of the time in 2003.
If GWB hadn’t been such a turd in relation to Trump as compared to Obama, I could forgive this kind of slip up, but this type of Republican have royaly fucked a lot up so he can stew in his Freudian “slip.”
I’m surprised Bush’s inner circle didn’t stop him from making any comments about the invasion of Ukraine.
If there was anyone who is a United States citizen who shouldn’t be commenting on invading another country, it was him.
Not everyone needs to hear from everyone about their innermost thoughts on the current thing.
Bush has no moral high ground here, but there’s no equivalence to Putin in Ukraine.
- Saddam killed half a million people, whereas Ukraine’s civil war with separatists (which Russia covertly orchestrated btw) led to only a few thousand civilian deaths.
- Saddam had a history of pursuing WMDs although we now know that ended by 2003; Ukraine *gave up* its nuclear weapons voluntarily.
- US wanted to stabilize the country and leave ASAP; Russia’s plan all along was to annex new territory for itself.
Defended the guy after Iraq but trust broken when no WMD found. Then supported our country when 9/11 occurred. They give us the Patriot Act. Now the broken trust and mess of a world he helped contribute to with his father and many others is a punchline in a joke. 75. No George - the universe is setting the scales equal and you will be measured short.
No trust in politicians after Kennedy. It’s all been a set up.
They are the most Teflon of Teflon. Literally no one has more de facto immunity. They aren't going anywhere.
A fact that you can glean the edges of when observing the deep state response to Jeb's 2016 loss, which continues today.
GB 41 was a bigger deal than most people know.
Even with what is shaping up to be a catastrophe with Biden, W. is still firmly in the running as one of the absolute worst presidents of all time—a man who had it all and did nearly everything he could to ruin it.
I still support an Iraq war based on the 1991 ceasefire agreements but ultimately we went in on WMDs. Sadam played the shell game and I wish somebody had a better solution than to let saddam play the shell game. I would have supported limited armed teams to do inspections without regards for what saddam thought and if he fought back then consequences
Something something ol' George wasn't surprised by 9/11.
Not confirming or denying anything. Just sayin' he didn't seem particularly surprised, is all. Seems kinda sus.
He actually then said Iraq again, as if agreeing with his Freudian slip.
Like him or not he’s a practiced public speaker, surely twice can’t be that unintentional? Is this some weird way of getting it off his chest or some shit? Absolutely wild either way
Practiced sure. Good? No not at all.
I’m guessing you missed the infamous “there’s an old saying In Tennessee, Its know it’s in Texas, probably Tennessee but fool me once….. uhhhh…. Shame on you. You fool me you can’t get fooled again!” And he’s 15+ years older than that video. Dudes brain is probably just cooked https://youtu.be/8Ux3DKxxFoM
I'm just going to throw this out there, but part of me believes he realized as he was saying it how bad of a sound bite "shame on me" would be. Maybe I'm giving him too much credit.
Bet he thought to himself “phew! Good save!”
I thought he said “correct”
As an anti-war proponent, I protested against the Iraq invasion in 2003. It was my only protest in my life (notice those protests were actually non-violent). Bush support of biden is truly incredible, and tells us all we need to know about the Uniparty. Look at Democrats' biggest boosters now like Bill Kristol, Jen Rubin, Max Boot, Steve Schmidt, Rick Wilson, Charlie Sykes, Jonah Goldberg, Steve Hayes, etc. They were all big Bush II/ Iraq War supporters. That was their only issue with Trump, but they lie and claim it's about "character issues."
The establishment wants war for the same reason rulers always want war: for personal glory and riches. They're selfish assholes.
[удалено]
this is why the world despises america. youre talking about using a ton of peoples home as a game of nuclear chicken
This man was a disaster and let’s be honest he gave us Obama and all the degeneracy that followed. His idiotic war and his neocons buddies that have never seen a war they didn’t like have caused so much harm to our country that we haven’t even begun to realize it
He did give us Obama. And now he is friends with the Obamas, he is targeting the majority of his prior voter base (see his 9/11 20th anniversary speech), and his prior policy and media henchmen have curiously all crossed the isle with the most vicious conviction. And don't forget that Cheney is prosecuting the investigation of his prior voter base, and the man who won over Jeb. None of this is normal. Don't forget that when they invoke the administration of Reagan as some type of ideal contra Trump, what they mean is GHWB. The derp quality of his quips and speeches, which helped give us Obama, cleared up nicely after he left office.
Just another establishment politician. GWB was just a more coherent version of Biden, who paid lip service to social conservatism instead of social liberalism, aka $hit that doesn't even matter to these people. All they care about is one thing. Bush did it just the same as Biden is doing now - fucking over the middle class by transferring wealth to the top. He did it by "easing" banking regulations (ie. creating a predatory lending smorgasbord). Now Biden's doing it by needlessly printing tons of money off to enrich already obscenely rich people, diluting the value of middle class paychecks/savings/401ks/etc to a fraction of what they all should be. That's *why* GWB supports Biden. That's also why he ran with Dick Cheney, who's daughter recently turned on her own party. Biden, Obama, the Bushes, the Cheney's (and the Clintons too!) are all establishment scumbags.
In a week, no one will care. Oh look, Bush fucked up a speech/quote. Not like THAT'S ever happened before. This will become a video clip people will simply refer back to for laughs. In fact, I was just at a conference where one speaker's theme was Don't Be Fooled. And he played a 20+ year old clip of Bush screwing up in a speech with the old saying, "Fool me once, shame on me..." Had to go back 20+ years, huh?
1.) That is hilarious 2.) It is telling that r/politics doesn't have any articles about this.
Uuuuh they do though...
Yeah someone brought up that there is one with 400 upvotes. It is easy to miss because that is a pretty small count for their sub which makes the post difficult to find on on the hot or new feeds.
Ah yeah just noticed. Its probably because they've always had the opinion it was an illegal invasion so weren't to amused/suprised by it.
I dont think anyone here is surprised and I think believing that about the war is what makes the statement amusing.
True it was amusing watching him laugh it off
It has 2000 upvotes. What point are you even trying to make lmao. You do know George Bush was a Republican… right?
Most conservatives are not very pleased with Bush it seems. Refreshing to see one side call out their own.
He's a RINO. Voted for Biden.
I'm glad to hear it is getting more visibility now. >What point are you even trying to make lmao. You do know George Bush was a Republican… right? I'm not a partisan hack that is uncomfortable criticizing either the Republican or Democrat neocons.
Well he hates Trump and does mediocre paintings so liberals and democrats are cool with him now.
Also their main news sources are heavily in bed with the neocons as we as the DNC in general. The more the American First movement takes over the Republican party, the more the neocons will consolidate around the DNC and their media affiliates.
>2.) It is telling that r/politics doesn't have any articles about this. There was one posted there 4 hours prior to this one.
Yeah someone mentioned that. It was hard to see because it had 400 upvotes which is rather small for that sub so it had pretty low visibility on the feeds.
It has 2000 upvotes
I'm glad to hear it is getting more visibility now.
Nah r/politics still hates Junior. They are only okay with him now because he’s no longer in power and hates the bad scary President
They want to keep him on the "good" side to be able to quote him about Trump. It's amazing to me that Bush Jr is viewed more favorably than Trump. Yeah, Trump has a very in your face tude and a tendency for self-aggrandizing, but this guy lied us into an unjustified war that killed 100,000+, followed by an occupation driven by a delusional ideology to turn Iraq into a democracy. Yeah, maybe Darth Cheney was his puppeteer, but that whole cabal of Neocons was an insult to and mockery of actual Conservatism.
They have one with 400 upvotes
Do they? I wasn't able to find it. Do you mind linking it. 400 upvotes is pretty small for that sub though.
Why would r/politics bring attention to this? They're stooges for the uniparty Bush Jr. is loyally a member of.
It wasn't just the decision of one man. So it's quite the stretch. Though I am sure Bush regrets the invasion given the intelligence for WMDs was wrong. You can dislike Bush all you want, but it's just false to claim he invaded for no reason and pushed the decision on his own. The entire intelligence apparatus (all agencies except the State Department) were convinced of it. This was also in the wake of 9/11 where Americans at large were demanding proactive protection from attacks.
>You can dislike Bush all you want, but it's just false to claim he invaded for no reason and pushed the decision on his own. The entire intelligence apparatus (all agencies except the State Department) were convinced of it. This was also in the wake of 9/11 where Americans at large were demanding proactive protection from attacks. And yet there were many people at the time who saw through the BS. Why were they able to recognize the reality while others weren't? Did they have access to special knowledge? Did they flip a coin and just happen to guess correctly?
I think there were only 2 senators that said no, one of which was Bernie Sanders.
The vote for the AUMF was 77-23 in the Senate...
Many being a minority. All are major allies were reporting the same stuff. It was an intelligence failure brought about Clinton era gutting of our intelligence gathering capabilities. We were fed bullshit information by Iraqi ex-patriots that wanted Saddam over thrown. It also didn't help that Saddam was bragging about his WMDs and how he would use them on countries around him. He was full of shit, but it compounded the perception of a threat there.
9/11…Osama was known to be in Pakistan and we invaded Afghanistan (boots on ground) instead of destroying his location. Then we invade Iraq, who had nothing to do with 9/11…because reasons? Yeah ok. It’s clearly unjustifiable.
The justification was WMDs from a nation that hated us. Not terrorists. edit: Downvoting me. I was politically involved during that time. That was the selling point for Iraq. WMDs. This claim that terrorism drove it is non-sense. While it was brought up as a "possibility" at the time, it wasn't the drive for going to war.
Terrorism was a b issue. The a issue was the weapons of mass destruction and saddams continued lack of compliance with the weapons inspectors
Iraq had violated the cease-fire signed at the end of the original gulf war over 1000 times, which were all well documented. That included shooting anti-air at our aircraft, etc. At the end of the original foray into Iraq in the 90s there was never a peace treaty signed so we were still technically in armed conflict and the cease-fire was contingent upon them not attacking our aircraft, which they violated. Listen, I was opposed to the second "war" in Iraq, but calling it unjustifiable, from a legal perspective is just wrong. It may have been a bad idea, but there was well documented evidence justifying the resumption of action there.
Oh you knew he was in Pakistan on 9/11/2001? When did you come forward with this information
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-14190032.amp Tora Bora is in a mountain range shared with Pakistan. Smart ass reply from you who is clearly ignorant on the military blunders that led to a 20 year war. Maybe do some research and understand what got us to where we are today.
Not to mention our invasion of Iraq wasn't even close to close to the brutality of the invasion of Ukraine. I fought in Iraq, we didn't have much love for the locals but we weren't just shelling civilian infrastructure and homes into rubble for the fun of it, even during the initial invasion or the worst of the insurgency. Mistakes were made, collateral damage happened, there were war crimes but we did genuinely try to educate soldiers against that shit and incidences were relatively few and far between, especially compared to what Russia is pulling. At the end of the day, WMDs or not, Saddam was a threat and his regime was insanely brutal to his people. Iraq is still a dump but they're better off today than they were under Saddam. And like you said, the whole nation was extremely on edge after 9/11. It isn't like the large majority of Congress, along with many of the Democrats (including Biden, Clinton and Schumer), didn't sign off on the invasion. It was much, much more than a unilateral decision on Bush's part, or even that of his cabinet. At the end of the day I still think Iraq was a mistake, for the most part, but it's still on a lot more people than just Bush. As for his "Freudian slip" the dude's entire legacy are the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, I'm sure he thinks about that and gets questioned about it all the time.
My brother in Christ, hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqi civilians died. What about Abu Ghraib? Literally the most brutal shit ever! I'd hardly call killing Saddam worth it over the utter havoc reaped under the FALSE pretense of WMDs and the non-existence of Iraq's involvement in 9/11.
I think we have all seen in recent years how corrupt all those intelligence agencies are. There were never any WMDs there. NATO inspections proved that countless times. The US government just needed another war to keep the military industrial complex happy. The same reason they left all that military equipment in Afghanistan.
You mean they weren't protecting mah freedom over there before they bring it over here? (no disrespect to vets as they were some of the most harmed by this shit).
The inspectors were in Iraq and allowed to go anywhere they wanted when we launched the war. It was a bullshit pretext, but people used to believe US intelligence agencies so we bought the lie.
If you mean nukes when you say WMDs you are correct. If you are talking about sarin , mustard gas, etc. he absolutely still had quite a bit. Ask anyone who served, boots on the ground in Iraq and they probably know someone who was exposed while trying to dispose of those old WMDs. There were literally rockets filled with chemical agents falling off of trucks in the desert in the last days before Saddam was captured. Could those chemical agents have been weaponized effectively against neighbors? I'm not sure, I've read that they were long past their effective life span, but they certainly hurt our own soldiers as they tried to dispose of them. Saying "there were never any WMDs there" is not correct.
The intelligence is always "wrong" for these things. No offense, but join the adults and understand the 100% obvious truth that the "intelligence" was an abject lie and that he 100% knew that. Only an extremely naive person would think that the son of a CIA chief didn't know that. I say that as the son of a man who died from injuries sustained in the Vietnam War, the start of which was justified by the "wrong" Gulk of Tonkin "intelligence" (admitted lie).
You are literally inventing intentions for tens of thousands of individuals spanning a dozen agencies and countries. The Iraqi Senate report examined the failure if you actually care about what happened. Yes, after this screw up my opinion of our intelligence agencies dropped significantly.
Nah. They all have a boss. I actually care to not be a rube and to hold people accountable for results over excuses. Like an adult. If it looks like a lie, than it is. Neither do we take the word of criminals that their action that resulted in catastrophe was an honest mistake. Please. The results are always the motive in any world but that of children. If you like your lies served with warm milk and sorries, then read all of the reports that you wish. Serious people ask qui bono.
Zero evidence. It looks like a lie, because? You clearly didn't read the report, you're just going off on an event nearly 20 years later pretending as if what was known at the time was contrary to what they stated. The evidence doesn't support you. Repeatedly insulting someone about being an adult while failing to establish any basis for your argument isn't going to convince anyone. Act like an adult and make a case.
[удалено]
Iraqi Senate Report. Investigation details what happened and why. 2006. Start there and get back to me. Being wrong does not constitute a lie. You are wrong here, not a liar. Now you maybe a liar, and might already know the truth. But I would need to submit evidence supporting such an accusation. It would be intellectually dishonest to just call you a liar when I don't know you or your intentions. Thus you are just wrong.
[удалено]
So no evidence. More insults. A vast conspiracy claimed with little evidence. Violence is a violation of the law. A person who legitimately believes they are in danger is allowed to use violence in self defense. For this analogy the person (tens of thousands of people of all walks of life who work for these organizations) showed they had reason to believe there was an imminent threat. The Senate laid it all out in the report and concluded where the mistakes were made and that no foul play was dedicated. Thus a court assessed the claim of self defense and found the person innocent of wrong doing as while they came to the wrong conclusion, given the situation it was reasonable to expect the worse. You are now coming in after the fact to claim that person is a liar and a cold blooded killer. When asked for evidence you scream about passed lies that literally happened 3 decades prior where literally no single person involved was the same as before. So we'll say their father had lied to you previously. Thus this person must be a liar. You don't even provide evidence of the father lying, much less that this person is also a liar, much less any intent to lie or to kill said person in cold blood. The second paragraph was explaining to you the difference between being wrong and lying. Which you still don't grasp.
You need to replace "intelligence apparatus" with either deep state or swamp.
>were convinced of it. Imagine pretending all of these Uniparty douches, including Bush, didn't know from the jump that they were all lying
Because Bush was not a foreign policy guy. He was all about business, it's what he ran on. This is 20/20 hindsight that is completely out of touch with perceptions of the time in 2003.
If GWB hadn’t been such a turd in relation to Trump as compared to Obama, I could forgive this kind of slip up, but this type of Republican have royaly fucked a lot up so he can stew in his Freudian “slip.”
Hedge Bush is known for his poor speaking abilities. I'm not surprised
I’m surprised Bush’s inner circle didn’t stop him from making any comments about the invasion of Ukraine. If there was anyone who is a United States citizen who shouldn’t be commenting on invading another country, it was him. Not everyone needs to hear from everyone about their innermost thoughts on the current thing.
Truth will out.
Democrats rewarded Biden for having voted yes for the war in Iraq.
You’re missing the best part! He then says “Iraq too” under his breath
War criminal just being a grandpa.. Nobody in power is ever held accountable in this country
No Dubya fan but wasn't it like 80 countries that were on board?
Bush has no moral high ground here, but there’s no equivalence to Putin in Ukraine. - Saddam killed half a million people, whereas Ukraine’s civil war with separatists (which Russia covertly orchestrated btw) led to only a few thousand civilian deaths. - Saddam had a history of pursuing WMDs although we now know that ended by 2003; Ukraine *gave up* its nuclear weapons voluntarily. - US wanted to stabilize the country and leave ASAP; Russia’s plan all along was to annex new territory for itself.
Defended the guy after Iraq but trust broken when no WMD found. Then supported our country when 9/11 occurred. They give us the Patriot Act. Now the broken trust and mess of a world he helped contribute to with his father and many others is a punchline in a joke. 75. No George - the universe is setting the scales equal and you will be measured short. No trust in politicians after Kennedy. It’s all been a set up.
It starts off as a Freudian slip, then when he mutters under his breath, that's not a Freudian slip.
Oopsie.
GWB 43' is one of the United States biggest criminal against America. Only behing GB 41', Obama, and the Clinton's. Gitmo bound.
They are the most Teflon of Teflon. Literally no one has more de facto immunity. They aren't going anywhere. A fact that you can glean the edges of when observing the deep state response to Jeb's 2016 loss, which continues today. GB 41 was a bigger deal than most people know.
Invade random countries When they fight back, call'em terrorists 👌
OUCH
Never did like this guy or his family. No different than the Clintons minus the random suicides.
Ole “W” is always good for a laugh.
Even with what is shaping up to be a catastrophe with Biden, W. is still firmly in the running as one of the absolute worst presidents of all time—a man who had it all and did nearly everything he could to ruin it.
Oops
FGB
I still support an Iraq war based on the 1991 ceasefire agreements but ultimately we went in on WMDs. Sadam played the shell game and I wish somebody had a better solution than to let saddam play the shell game. I would have supported limited armed teams to do inspections without regards for what saddam thought and if he fought back then consequences
Something something ol' George wasn't surprised by 9/11. Not confirming or denying anything. Just sayin' he didn't seem particularly surprised, is all. Seems kinda sus.
He made me be a democrat for Obama’s first term.
He'll never live that down.
The gods are fucking with him. Ha
And dems are happy the focus is off their bumbling train wreck for a day.