White House told of militant claim two hours after Libya attack!

[hnumpah]

Tell you what...

You believe what you want.

I'll believe what I want.

As far as I am concerned, the topic is closed.

[sirs]

Sounds fair enough....as it relates to the facts and illogic in claiming Bushco as some dishonest nefairous entity.  See, the point to most of this for me, is to highlight how illogical, borderline irrational it is, to claim some nefarious, dishonest ploy by "Bushco" in taking us into Iraq, with all the facts and common sense to the contrary.  Now there's PLENTY to criticize as to the judgement of going into Iraq, whether he didn't allow enough time for non-military means to work, or how he handled the initial post-Saddam logistics of Iraq, when the mission was accomplished in taking him out.  There's a plentiful amount of meat to dig in there.  It's just .....sad to see such efforts employed to try and make something out of something that's not really there

Now, we can shift back to Benghazi gate, and the apparent double standard you've employed there     

[Xavier_Onassis]

That's a fact only AFTER we disposed of Saddam & his regime, nor was anyone referencing that Saddam was going to attack U.S. soil, so don't even try to pull that BS

-----------------------------------------------------------
Saddam had no way of using any WMD's against any Americans, before or after his downfall. And Condi Rice was talking about a "smoking gun becoming a mushroom cloud"or some such rot.

There was no reason to invade Iraq in defense of the US. Bush LIED US INTO A WAR, and that is that.

The BS is all yours. You have no right to tell me what I can or cannot write.

[sirs]

There was no reason to invade Iraq in defense of the US. Bush LIED US INTO A WAR, and that is that.

H was smart enough to back away from such an ignorant invalid accusation, even defending the notion he ever said such.  But not xo, no-sir-ree.  And he makes that pile of BS even bigger with the again asinine effort to make this about some notion of preventing Saddam attacking the U.S.

Priceless

[hnumpah]

H was smart enough to back away from such an ignorant invalid accusation...

What was there to back away from? Your false claim that I had made such an accusation?

[sirs]

Asked and answered already......As far as your effort to hang on the specific phrasing of how you didn't claim" lied us into war", but then present ongoing criticisms of how dishonest & dastardly Bush was, and Bushco was, that all that grey apparently hides....kinda defeats the effort in trying to make this about a single phrase, doncha think?  but hey, if it makes you feel better, Sirs was wrong in saying that H specifically said Bush lied us into war.  What he has said is pretty much analogous, but specifically, he never apparently said such 

[BT]

H was smart enough to back away from such an ignorant invalid accusation...

What was there to back away from? Your false claim that I had made such an accusation?

lol

Isn't this where i came in the first time

Something about how does one back away from a position one never had.

But apparently that has been asked and answered to at least one parties satisfaction.

And i don't want Planes parse-a-phobia to worsen.