Cost of the Iraq War - Check out these numbers!

[satch919]

Im sure those of you that follow current events know about the Bush Administration's request(demand really) for more funding. The amount? 80 billion dollars. I just saw an article in a newspaper that I get, the Press Enterprise I think, about the breakdown of the 80 billion.

Here's a scan of the newspaper

If its hard to see, I'll write it out for you.

How 80 billion breaks down:

-$6.7 billion a month
-$1.5 billion a week
-$219 million a day
-$9.1 million an hour
-$152,000 a minute
-$2,500 a second

Its amazing how willing they are to spending it on war and death but yet we have hospitals and schools struggling out here in CA and in other states. Do we get to vote on how our money is being spent? No. For all I know, the taxes that I paid went towards bombing a civilian neighborhood in Iraq. But we all know that killing people is 10 times more important that educating a populace right? :hmph: Or maybe, just maybe we could actually use that money to fund the struggling No Child Left Behind Act? Just a suggestion. Oh here's another suggestion: Take the millions that were spent on the Inauguration and give it to the war effort.

They're going to end up asking for tons more money in about 2-3 months. WHO THE F*** VOTED FOR THIS ADMINISTRATION!!?!?!!????

Also check out:

Terror recruitment on the rise in Europe


Typical Bush saying:
-We need to spend your tax dollars on a third world country because freedom is on the march. Im ridding the world of tyranny. I know because God speaks to me. -

 

[willyd]

Continue to bad mouth bush and god will smite you. He has divine right you know.

(jk)

 

[KoreBolteR]

they should pull out of there, and let the iraqis deal with this, thats what the iraqis and the middle easterns want.
America should just focus on afghanistan..catching osama, AND protecting thier borders (mexico) so that no terrorists can enter.

PS: there are loads of terrorists in USA now, because the mexican border is not so well sealed off. .

imo, they should spend all that money on homeland security and protecting the citizens at home ..

 

[burner69]

I agree with you, both entirely and at the same time, not fully at all.

Now, half of me, the half that looks at life as being a gift, something to treasure, make better for others, ourselves, says that spending $80bn on ending life is a sick, counter productive investment that will send a man like Bush straight into the open gates of hell.

Yet.

Another half, a half that's been bombarded by the hypocracy of Bush, the media, my prime minister, righties, gun-nuts, a few friends, and even perhaps a little logic - says that sometimes war is necessary, and when it is you better make dam sure you do it right, $80bn or not, or else it's all for nothing.

Which is why I try and think about wars not in terms of "they should not be happening because it's expensive, it kills people etc" I think of them in terms of necessity. Did we need to invade? Will we, and the invaded country, be better off?

Guess what.
$80bn is swirling down a toilet bowl along with compassion for human life, the truth; the chain pulled by Bush and the media who just LURRRVE to play his games.

2002: Iraq = WMDs, links to terrorists, active desire to attack the west.
2003: Honest
2004: They'll just take a while. Here, look at a picture of Iraqis torturing us. See how evil they are.
2005: F**k.............................. Hey, Iran! Wooo! Terrorism! Rarrr! Nukes! Ahhhh! Unfree! Aiieee!

 

[KoreBolteR]

2006: Earth in pieces

 

[Korgoth]

How many poverty stricken children could 80 billion dollars benefit exactly? Well lets break this down, the christian childrens fund or whatever says they can feed, cloth, and school a child for .80 cents a day. So lets see, .80 cents a day, for 365 days comes to around 292 dollars a year. So 80 billion divided by 292 equals about 273,972,602
children that we could feed cloth and school this year, but instead, we spend that money fighting killing and occupying in a war that a whole lot of people don't agree with... Now how does that make us look?
(ps I suck at math so these numbers could be wrong )

 

[seinfeldrules]

How many poverty stricken children could 80 billion dollars benefit exactly?

How many freedom stricken people could this 80 billion dollars benefit exactly? How many soldiers could it protect from terrorist attacks?

 

[CptStern]

the real cost of the war

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Seinfeld where you given a warnings level because someone else did'nt like your opinion?

They gave me a warning level for posting terrorist made suicide bombing videos as proof in my arguements about their brutality succeeding much of what the forum "believes".

OT: You guys seem to think that kind of money could be spent in your interests; however, it cannot. For the member who was said that CA Hospitals are bad, remember, thats your own states doing -- and your own counties.

Course, its also your opinion that the hospitals are pathetic aswell.

 

[Korgoth]

How many freedom stricken people could this 80 billion dollars benefit exactly? How many soldiers could it protect from terrorist attacks?

Thats bull shit, sorry. What was I thinking, the right to go to starbucks on your lunch hour is far more important than a starving innocent child, and our soldiers wouldn't need protection if they weren't there in the first place. I've said it before and I'll say it again, if the iraqi people wanted change they would have brought it about themselves. Thats the way the world works, we shouldn't force our "freedoms" or our democracy on them.

We are no better than the "evil communists" of late when we do. You are very close minded seinfeld, look at the results. Iraq is a disaster, many have died and many more will die. The saddest part is, we've replaced a dictator with a puppet, (and if you don't think allawi will win then you are kidding yourself) These people are in no better shape right now than they were before the war.

I worked with a guy who was extremely against gay marriage and abortion and his answer to justify why he was against it was because his personal religous beliefs. He said he didn't want his tax dollars to pay for abortions or help gay marriages. Fine, but what if I don't want my tax dollars to pay for war and killing? I have no choice, even if my personal religous beliefs say otherwise?

This country is so screwed up its sad. The american people used to be good honest and compassionate people. Now we are scared vengeful bloodthirsty lunatics, its just to bad people like you can't see the shift this country has taken.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

and our soldiers wouldn't need protection if they weren't there in the first place.

9/11 occured. I'm glad their getting this much protection.

However, you have a point -- other things should not be neglected.

 

[KoreBolteR]

our soldiers wouldn't need protection if they weren't there in the first place..

i agree about what you say according to Iraq. but they should send more troops to afghanistan, and protect them there.

whilst looking for Osama bin laden and clan. :frown:

 

[seinfeldrules]

What was I thinking, the right to go to starbucks on your lunch hour is far more important than a starving innocent child,

Do I live in Iraq?

and our soldiers wouldn't need protection if they weren't there in the first place

But they are, get over it. By refusing to give this 80 billion dollars, you provide two conceivable options.
A.) Iraq is left to its own and falls into chaos for good.
B.) Soldiers go without the necessary protection.

Neither option is acceptable. Whine all you want about the invasion, but dont whine about the money needed to finish the job.

You are very close minded seinfeld, look at the results. Iraq is a disaster, many have died and many more will die.

So are you. Look at the long term possibilities of a free Iraq.

The saddest part is, we've replaced a dictator with a puppet,

The Iraqi people could vote for Saddam for all I care. At least they have the right to do so now.

This country is so screwed up its sad. The american people used to be good honest and compassionate people.

You called me close minded? Come on now, lets lay off that avenue until you stroll down Open Minded Street yourself.

 

[satch919]

the real cost of the war

True and it is sad. However, the financial cost is what will effect us directly. The blood of the dead civilians is on Bush's and his administration's hands. I didn't want this war.

This 80 billion won't go directly to the troops. Some of it will be siphoned off to other groups that stand to benefit from this war. You're trusting the same group of people to provide the troops with stuff needed for the war when, not even 2 months ago, couldn't get flak vests, armor, and surgeons scrubs to the guys on the front lines. This money isn't going where its supposed to.

 

[K e r b e r o s]

Must ... not ... post ...

 

[burner69]

9/11 occured. I'm glad their getting this much protection.
.

Why? US Foreign Policy.
Response. More hardcore foreign policy.
Hey, have we just gone full circle? Let's look...

US Foreign policy --> 9/11 --> more US foreign policy --> ???

You see? That $80bn is counter productive, but unfortunatley necessary because of idiots in power making decisions for the world, and lying to their people to get them to tag along.

We live in a crazy world.

 

[Eg.]

ill do it for u,

ok, america is spending a lot of money on the war, does it affect you? no. and we took over this nation while barely lifting a finger.

america killed a few civilains in iraq and then a bunch load were taken out by arab terrorists. does it affect u? no

bush is religous, does it affect you? no

the reason why everybody seems to want to give a damn is because americas so damn big. everybody wishes they could be like us.

and dont say "thats stupid, no one is jealous of america". but yet every one is sub-conciously. when u were in school, u may have hated the jock because he got all the girls, and then u told your friends hes a dick and, at home along, you started doing push ups.

on here we have invading nations as the new girl. its because we can go and do anything we want anywhere that gets people pissed off.

 

[Eg.]

Why? US Foreign Policy.
Response. More hardcore foreign policy.
Hey, have we just gone full circle? Let's look...

US Foreign policy --> 9/11 --> more US foreign policy --> ???

You see? That $80bn is counter productive, but unfortunatley necessary because of idiots in power making decisions for the world, and lying to their people to get them to tag along.

We live in a crazy world.

9/11 was not due to our forgein policy, that is just crap. i we give more aid and help then any other nation, thats why we got attacked, and not say spain for its thriving economy and military strength

i like how russia treats terrorist nations, bomb out there capitol till it looks like post-war warsaw

Grozny:

Warsaw:

sorry for the double post, it took some time to get those pics.

 

[CptStern]

9/11 was not due to our forgein policy, that is just crap. i we give more aid and help then any other nation, thats why we got attacked

foreign policy:

The diplomatic policy of a nation in its interactions with other nations.


:upstare:

 

[Eg.]

and it still had nothing to do with it. Everybody says, "oh it was americas forgein policy" ok, which part of it? was it the military aid or the medical aid, was it before or after we tried to resuce hostages from ur state? what?

 

[CptStern]

I pointed that out because that alone pretty much invalidates the rest of your argument

 

[firemachine69]

they should pull out of there, and let the iraqis deal with this, thats what the iraqis and the middle easterns want.
America should just focus on afghanistan..catching osama, AND protecting thier borders (mexico) so that no terrorists can enter.

PS: there are loads of terrorists in USA now, because the mexican border is not so well sealed off. .

imo, they should spend all that money on homeland security and protecting the citizens at home ..

You should be more worried about our "borders". They're a f*cking joke, our system is a f*cking joke. As always, punish the law abiding citizens and let the real troublemakers run free. :upstare:

 

[satch919]

ill do it for u,

ok, america is spending a lot of money on the war, does it affect you? no. and we took over this nation while barely lifting a finger.

america killed a few civilains in iraq and then a bunch load were taken out by arab terrorists. does it affect u? no

bush is religous, does it affect you? no

the reason why everybody seems to want to give a damn is because americas so damn big. everybody wishes they could be like us.

and dont say "thats stupid, no one is jealous of america". but yet every one is sub-conciously. when u were in school, u may have hated the jock because he got all the girls, and then u told your friends hes a dick and, at home along, you started doing push ups.

on here we have invading nations as the new girl. its because we can go and do anything we want anywhere that gets people pissed off.

America spending billions on Iraq - Is it going to affect me? Sure it is. Thats money that could have been used to open up new freeways that are congested right now. That money could have been used to reopen one of many closed hospitals in S. California. That money could have been used to buffer the flood of illegals into California.

Killing civilians, Arab leaders, and insurgents - Does it affect me? Perhaps, in the long run. By killing peoples families and their leaders, we caused more hatred towards the United States. Iraq now has become a terrorist nation. They're now recruiting and running operations there. Europe has also become a large recruitment area for those wanting to join the insurgents. We've had a hand in creating the hatred that the Islamic have towards the US. Therefore, the risk of domestic terrorist attacks will rise. "Killing a few civilians"? Try 15475-17703 people. Some consider that estimate to be conservative. So it might be a lot more.

Bush is religious - Does it affect me? It sure does. He wants to ban abortion. He is also giving lots of money to churches and religious groups. Where's the separation of Church and State. There was a time in history when the leaders gave the churches tons of power and money. That was called a monarchy run by a King and Queen. In case you haven't noticed, the US is supposed to be a Democracy. There's a reason why people wanted that separation between the church and state. I don't want a President who thinks he speaks directly to God. His policies are influenced by his religion. Not everyone shares those views. We have Jews, Muslims, Catholics, Bhuddists, Atheists, etc. His policies have to reflect the diversity of this nation, not one group.

 

[firemachine69]

It had to be done. Being the last (and only) superpower in the world, it was "your job". I agree, not done well. But he's done more then that flacktard Kerry would have ever done. He woulda shit his pants 9/11, and cried to his mommy. He did NOT have what it takes to govern such a large state. His foundations are fairly solid, but he does NOT have that "oomph" to keep the country chugging along. Your US would STILL be in a state of chaos had Kerry been elected. Which is unfortunate. There's quite a few things I disagree with Bush on.

 

[CptStern]

It had to be done. Being the last (and only) superpower in the world, it was "your job". I agree, not done well. But he's done more then that flacktard Kerry would have ever done. He woulda shit his pants 9/11, and cried to his mommy. He did NOT have what it takes to govern such a large state. His foundations are fairly solid, but he does NOT have that "oomph" to keep the country chugging along. Your US would STILL be in a state of chaos had Kerry been elected. Which is unfortunate. There's quite a few things I disagree with Bush on.

I'd trade in shitty pants for no war in iraq anyday ..call kerry what you will but he didnt invade a country on false pretenses

 

[seinfeldrules]

call kerry what you will but he didnt invade a country on false pretenses

Did he vote for it?

 

[CptStern]

who cares? did he make the executive decision?

 

[satch919]

It had to be done. Being the last (and only) superpower in the world, it was "your job". I agree, not done well. But he's done more then that flacktard Kerry would have ever done. He woulda shit his pants 9/11, and cried to his mommy. He did NOT have what it takes to govern such a large state. His foundations are fairly solid, but he does NOT have that "oomph" to keep the country chugging along. Your US would STILL be in a state of chaos had Kerry been elected. Which is unfortunate. There's quite a few things I disagree with Bush on.

Need I remind you that Kerry actually went over to Vietnam? What did Bush do? Stayed here is the states snorting coke and drinking while his fellow Americans were dying on foreign soil. And you say that Kerry would have shit his pants? And how do you know how Kerry would have handled the situation? Can you predict things? Do you have a crystal ball? If so, tell me the winning Lotto numbers. So Bush has more "oomph" because he dresses up like a cowboy? His "oomph" has got up into a lot of trouble.

Yeah, Iraq would still be in chaos but at least it would be directed from someone new. Bush has already f***ed things up so why would you want someone to continue on that screwed up path.

Example:

-You're a CEO/boss of a company. You invest lots of money and get high returns on it. One day you get a new employee. You give that employee the task of managing your companies money. 2 months go by and things aren't looking so good. Your profits have declined and your company isn't worth what it used to be. You check the books and find out that your new employee has made mistake after mistake causing the company to lose its money. You confront him and he swears that he didn't do anything wrong and that he was acting with good intentions. Do you keep him because he has good intentions of managing your money? Or do you fire him because he's screwed the company's standing. I say fire the dumbass and get someone more qualified.

Bush has had mistake after mistake but its okay because he's got resolve right? He's steadfast? Wrong. The guy is a moron with moronic policies.

Headline in the LA Times:

Budget Deficit to Set Record - Bush's $80-billion request for Afghanistan and Iraq would result in a shortfall of $427 billion. Analysts say the gap will worsen.

Hmmmm. And you people wanted his flawed policies? :hmph:

 

[Bodacious]

It is amazing how much ignorance is shown by the left.

@Satch919 - "Do we get to vote on how our money is being spent?"

I understand what you mean, but in a sense you do get to vote on how the gove spends money when you vote for your congressman and voting against Bush. I am aware you didn't vote for Bush, but what do you think Kerry would have done?

MR. RUSSERT: Do you believe that we should reduce funding that we are now providing for the operation in Iraq?

SEN. KERRY: No. I think we should increase it.

MR. RUSSERT: Increase funding.

SEN. KERRY: Yes.

MR. RUSSERT: By how much?

SEN. KERRY: By whatever number of billions of dollars it takes to win...

Source

Second, you need to face facts and realize that the cost of the inauguration was paid for by donors.

@ The people who think Iraq is a disaster - You are brainwashed by the MSM. Even what they have now is better than the oppression they lived with under saddam. Now they have hope. Hope they will be free. Under saddam they didn't have that at all.

"This 80 billion won't go directly to the troops. Some of it will be siphoned off to other groups that stand to benefit from this war. You're trusting the same group of people to provide the troops with stuff needed for the war when, not even 2 months ago, couldn't get flak vests, armor, and surgeons scrubs to the guys on the front lines. This money isn't going where its supposed to."

This is more media propaganda. 80 billion is a lot. Wait until the spending bill goes to congress and see how it is broken down. I can guarantee a lot of it will go to troop's salaries. The armor stuff is more propaganda from the left. There is no soldier over there who does not have body armor in their possession. I speak from personal experience on this one. I defy you to find me one person who didn't have a flak vest on the front lines like you suggest.


US Foreign policy --> 9/11 --> more US foreign policy --> ???

You see? That $80bn is counter productive...

Counterproductive how?

There is more to the issue than just foreign policy. Steps could have been taken domestically prior to 9/11 to strengthen intelligence gathering and seeking out to punish those supporting terror. Like Kerry said, terrorism was a nuisance before 9/11, like speeding or something. Had the attitude at the time been different chances are 9/11 could have been prevented.

I don't want a President who thinks he speaks directly to God. His policies are influenced by his religion. Not everyone shares those views. We have Jews, Muslims, Catholics, Bhuddists, Atheists, etc. His policies have to reflect the diversity of this nation, not one group.

I defy you to produce anything Bush has put his name on that is either the product of the the christian god speaking to him. I also defy you to produce something Bush has put his name on that single out christianty over another religeon.

 

[CptStern]

It is amazing how much ignorance is shown by the left.

pot calling the kettle black? here's an example

@ The people who think Iraq is a disaster - You are brainwashed by the MSM. Even what they have now is better than the oppression they lived with under saddam. Now they have hope. Hope they will be free. Under saddam they didn't have that at all.

you cant seriously believe this crap can you? why is the current leader of iraq a terrorist and murderer? is this freedom? is this democracy? it's ignorance pure and simple. Oh the US is responsible for killing more iraqis than saddam ever was:

"Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.

show me where saddam was responsible for as many deaths of children ..the amount of hypocrisy you people are spoonfed is just astounding

I defy you to produce anything Bush has put his name on that is either the product of the the christian god speaking to him. I also defy you to produce something Bush has put his name on that single out christianty over another religeon.

unsubstanitated but compelling none-the-less

'We Have No King But Jesus" John Ashcroft

finally, news that Rumsfeld has resigned and has been replace by someone a little more ...biblical

that one is just for fun, so dont go holy hosannah on me

 

[seinfeldrules]

who cares? did he make the executive decision?

Why would he vote for something he wouldnt have done himself?

PS Saddam squandered 12 billion dollars in aid that could have fed the children.

 

[Absinthe]

God forbid Kerry actually believed his President when he was laying the case for Iraq.

 

[seinfeldrules]

God forbid Kerry actually believed his President when he was laying the case for Iraq.

You mean the intel, not the President. They saw the same stuff, came to the same conclusions.

 

[CptStern]

You mean the intel, not the President. They saw the same stuff, came to the same conclusions.

so you're saying bush's administration had no clue the CIA was basing part of their intelligence on the word of a terrorist and murderer? they wanted this before 9/11 they twisted the truth to [url=support their plan of invasion ..who has all the fat contracts in iraq? who is in charge of those companies?


http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/09/60minutes/main592330.shtml

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2004-01-11-oneill-iraq_x.htm

http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0110-03.htm

http://edition.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/10/oneill.bush/

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4044824/

http://www.sundayherald.com/39221

http://nuclearfree.lynx.co.nz/before9-11.htm

 

[Bodacious]

pot calling the kettle black? here's an example

you cant seriously believe this crap can you? why is the current leader of iraq a terrorist and murderer? is this freedom? is this democracy? it's ignorance pure and simple.

Are you denying that Saddam oppressed his people? Are you denying that now that Saddam isn't in power that they do not have hope and a desire to be free and prosper?

How is Alawi oppressing the Iraqis?

Why does his transgressions of the past matter? John Kerry is guilty of committing attrocites and I bet you wouldn't mind him leading America. Alawi is guilty of attrocties and just because Bush backs him he is shunned upon? Hipocrisy from the left? I think so.

Alawi can be a leader and democracy can still take hold. Show me how he is oppressing the Iraqi population.

Oh the US is responsible for killing more iraqis than saddam ever was:

"Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.

show me where saddam was responsible for as many deaths of children ..the amount of hypocrisy you people are spoonfed is just astounding

So? Have you not read the Duelfer report? Had those sanctions not been there who knows what kind of weapons Saddam would have or how many more people he would have imposed his will on.

There isn't anytin we can do to bring those lives back. Had Saddam complied with the demands of the rest of the world those sanctions would have been lifted and the death toll would be far less. The only one resonsible for the deaths of those children is Saddam for not being compliant. Sure the sanctions don't have to be imposed, but consider the concequences had they not. Do you think that everything would be fine and dandy had they not been imposed?

'We Have No King But Jesus" John Ashcroft

Hey, good job taking a quote out of context.

A slogan of the American revolution which was so distressing to the emissaries of the king that it was found in correspondence sent back to England, was the line, "We have no king but Jesus".

Obviously Ashcroft is speaking of somethign that was said over 200 years ago when America didn't even exist.

Still, you can't find anything that I requested above.

 

[seinfeldrules]

so you're saying bush's administration had no clue the CIA was basing part of their intelligence on the word of a terrorist and murderer?

If the Bush Admin. didnt, then neither did Clinton. Look back on some Clinton quotes on Saddam. Look at his attack on Iraq during his impeachment hearing. It clearly wasnt the fault of either Administration, but of the intelligence community in general (including GB and Russia). What is the chance of 3 of the top 4 intelligence agencies all being wrong at the same time.

 

[burner69]

ill do it for u,

ok, america is spending a lot of money on the war, does it affect you? no. and we took over this nation while barely lifting a finger.

america killed a few civilains in iraq and then a bunch load were taken out by arab terrorists. does it affect u? no

bush is religous, does it affect you? no

the reason why everybody seems to want to give a damn is because americas so damn big. everybody wishes they could be like us.

and dont say "thats stupid, no one is jealous of america". but yet every one is sub-conciously. when u were in school, u may have hated the jock because he got all the girls, and then u told your friends hes a dick and, at home along, you started doing push ups.

on here we have invading nations as the new girl. its because we can go and do anything we want anywhere that gets people pissed off.

Ha! OK, allow me to respond.

First of all, I'm not talking about me. Sure, bush being religious dosen't really affect me. You could carpet bomb Iran and if it wasn't for the news I wouldn't have a clue. But guess what, I actually give a crap about a country LYING, KILLING, BEING TOTAL F**KING HYPOCRITS, AND GENERALLY COVERING THE WOOL OVER PEOPLE'S EYES TO MAKE THEM IGNORE IT

You seriously think that OBL attacked you because you were giving out aid? You're an idiot, I'm sorry, but that's crap. Why not listen to what OBL had to say - he said he did it because of the US arsing up other countries. Now, why would he lie about that?

Let's take an example shall we?
Israel is given several million dollars a year in aid to help them defend themselves against the surrounding arab nations. Ok? Good ole US, nice one. Now... those surrounding arab nations need guns and weapons and bombs and tanks - and guess who supplies them. Yes, the US sells the surrounding arab nations with 80% of their arms. Lovelly aye?

Or how about the hypocracy in Iraq? Selling Saddam chemical weapons after he's just gassed 5000 of his own people - and you're fully aware of it.

How about the bullsh*t in Iran, saying they have nukes, but refusing to impose a nuclear ban, because you're selling them materials.

War on terror indeed.

But of course I'm only saying this because I'm so jealous of your country. OK, why am I?
I believe the UK has a higher standard of living, I can smoke dope without fear of being imprisoned, we don't have hurricanes n stuff. No, that was just your big fat head talking - if the US wasn't tossing weapons to unstable over militarised countries, then moving in and blowing them up, killing thousands, I wouldn't care less about you. I always thought the 'jock' at school was an ass-hole, especially if he went around beating up weaker kids.

 

[CptStern]

If the Bush Admin. didnt, then neither did Clinton. Look back on some Clinton quotes on Saddam. Look at his attack on Iraq during his impeachment hearing. It clearly wasnt the fault of either Administration, but of the intelligence community in general (including GB and Russia). What is the chance of 3 of the top 4 intelligence agencies all being wrong at the same time.

what intelligence community? the ones that are in the coalition? documents prove Blair fudged documents to make his case for war with Iraq ..anyone who doesnt see this is either not looking deep enough, or they just dont want to know

btw Russia was never sure of saddam possessing WMD

btw your answer clearly proves you didnt see F9/11 ..in it you clearly see Powell, and Condy rice say the exact same thing prior to 9/11: "Saddam doesnt have WMD"

 

[No Limit]

You mean the intel, not the President. They saw the same stuff, came to the same conclusions.

You are crazy if you honestly believe the congress and the American people see the same evidence. Bush gets daily briefings from the CIA, then he decides what intelligence he wants to show congress and the American people.

 

[Gray Fox]

Who says the left likes what kerry does. I mean yeah we like him better then Bush but that doesn't mean we agree with everything he does, we just disagree less with what he does than Bush.