RollingRock

The way things are going, he could hit that by next week.

They should have impeached. Most of congress voted to go to war because only evidence that favored war was presented. Any evidence or reports that suggested there were no WMD's was not brought before congress. When ALL evidence isn't presented, incorrect conclusions are often the result (as was the case here). Lies in the form of cherry-picked evidence and blatant omissions resulted in unnecessary military action.

Good riddance.

Bill Clinton did not present the case for war. He held no office at the time and had no part in the decision making. Why do you keep bringing him up? I've never been a defender of either Clinton. Bush (via Colin Powell) presented ONLY the evidence that supported attacking Iraq. They did not present any of the opposing arguments. He lied through omission and the result was a million plus dead people, including Iraqi civilians and American military. It was shameful, all the way around.

I don't think president Bush did nearly enough to examine and/or consider the multiple reports that stated the intelligence was wrong. He wanted to believe there were WMD's and dismissed any reports/evidence to the contrary. That's horribly irresponsible, at best. I'll always believe that the Iraq War will go done as one of the biggest mistakes in our nation's history. Additionally, it quite likely made terrorism worldwide much, much worse.

I put BeachOozer on ignore quite some time ago.

Troll thread.

I'm not a Gingrich fan, by any means, but he would be an upgrade from the racist Bannon.

Sounds like your hoping for one. I'm on the left and I don't want to see Tramp assassinated. I just want to see him gone and replaced with someone who is competent and not as reactionary.

Thanks, neue regel. Our troops deserve our best, including not sending them into conflicts when there are still other potential options to resolve that conflict. After all, they're the ones putting it all on the line, not the politicians. The president, senators, and/or congresscritters aren't out there on the battlefield being shot at. They should be making every decision as if they were going to be.

Why do you keep whipping out Democrats in every argument and ask "if my stance applies to them, too?" It's lame, Z. I'm an independent and have my share of criticisms for BOTH parties. When I state an opinion, it applies to EVERYONE (Democrat, Republican, Independent, non-politically affiliated). We should only use military force as a last option and/or if we are directly attacked. No other time.

Many of Bush's top donors were companies within the military industrial complex (including ex-VP Cheney's Halliburton). https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/05/the-right-and-wrong-questions-about-the-iraq-war/393497/

If Bill Clinton had bombed Iraq, I would have been against it, too. I don't play partisan favorites when it comes to sacrificing the lives of our troops.

Bush did lie. Along with the reports that Saddam had WMD's, there were also many reports that cast doubts on those reports. Bush chose to omit all opposition reports and unleash "Shock and Awe" on Iraq which killed far more civilians than it did Iraq military. I believe that we created many, many more Osama bin Ladens with our rush to war.

Exactly, ScottMon. There was still a lot of diplomacy we could have used rather than throwing our service members into an unwinnable, unnecessary war. The Iraq War will go down in history as one of the biggest mistakes in our nation's history.