Liberals Backtrack On WMD and War Powers
Jun 19, 2014 Political, Terrorism
It is amazing how politicians see things when their party is in power as opposed to how they see them when they are not in power. When George Bush was the president Congress gave him authority to use military force and about three of the nearly twenty items dealt with weapons of mass destruction (WMD). When it was reported that no WMD were found and when the war in Iraq was in chaos liberals started talking about Bush’s illegal war and that he overstepped his authority.
Fast forward to now. Barack Obama has made a mess of Iraq and his “greatest achievement” is falling apart as terrorists slice through that country like Hitler through Europe. He is considering military action in Iraq and Nancy Pelosi has indicated that he does not need to come to Congress for approval because the authorities are already there as a result of the 2001 and 2003 legislation that Bush used to engage in Iraq.
Pelosi told reporters that she agreed that the president has all of the authorities that he needs in the authorizations to use military force passed by Congress previously.
“All of the authorities are there. That doesn’t mean I want all of them to be used, especially boots on the ground,” she said. “But I definitely think the president has all of the authority he needs by dint of legislation that was passed in 2001 and 2003.”
She appeared to be referring to the authorizations to use military force passed after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks and the 2002 authorization to use force in Iraq. Neither of those authorizations have [sic] expired, although the official White House position is that the Iraq authorization should be repealed.
Obama is using, and Pelosi is supporting, the authorizations that the White House thinks should be repealed.
In other words, Pelosi and her liberal pals all said Bush did not have the authority to do what he did but that Obama has the authority, under the same legislation, to do what Bush did even though Obama thinks the authorization should be repealed.
This is how liberals think. They gave Bush authority and then said he abused it but now that Obama is doing the very same thing (or considering doing it) they say he has the authority.
Remember the claim that Bush lied about WMD? I told you then that a lot of the WMD made their way into Syria (where do you think Syria got the ones they used?) and that there was no doubt Hussein (Saddam, not Barack) stockpiled them. Some of them were declared to the UN inspectors and locked in bunkers. Remember the warnings about what would happen if they got into the wrong hands? But, but, he didn’t have any. Bush lied, people died.
Turns out that there are plenty of WMD in Iraq and while many of them have been degraded they are still lethal. The terrorists in ISIS have seized those chemical weapons.
Chemical weapons produced at the Al Muthanna facility, which Isis today seized, are believed to have included mustard gas, Sarin, Tabun, and VX.
Here is the CIA’s file on the complex.
Stockpiles of chemical munitions are still stored there. The most dangerous ones have been declared to the UN and are sealed in bunkers.
Although declared, the bunkers contents have yet to be confirmed.These areas of the compound pose a hazard to civilians and potential blackmarketers.
Numerous bunkers, including eleven cruciform shaped bunkers were exploited. Some of the bunkers were empty. Some of the bunkers contained large quantities of unfilled chemical munitions, conventional munitions, one-ton shipping containers, old disabled production equipment (presumed disabled under UNSCOM supervision), and other hazardous industrial chemicals.
There were WMD in Iraq when the US issued its ultimatum and Hussein moved many to Syria. The rest are in bunkers and pose a threat if they fall into the wrong hands.
Well, they have fallen into the wrong hands and now they will be used by the blood thirsty ISIS animals to harm many more people.
If they end up in the US you can blame Pelosi and all the other liberals who screamed about ending the war and that no WMDs exist and all the BS about Bush lying.
You can blame Barack Obama for the inept way he has handled everything in Iraq. His ego led him to believe that the bad guys will love us if we appease them.
How is that working out?
While Obama dances around like his ass is on fire and his head is catching Iraq is literally disintegrating before our eyes.
Now the bad guys have chemical weapons, the ones the liberals said did not exist, and they WILL use them.
Government officials are putting a great spin on this about the items being old and unstable and how they doubt they can be used to make chemical weapons.
Are these the same experts who told us that the terrorists were defeated, in shambles? Are these the same folks who said that Iraq was stable and we could leave? Are these the same people who have been wrong so many other times?
The belief is that the chemicals could not be safely moved. Really? Does anyone think that will stop the people who have just scored the Holy Grail of terror weapons?
The ISIS leader said he is coming for America (IN America). I bet now he will be even more motivated to do so.
If some of these chemicals make their way here you can thank the liberals and their policies for the deaths that occur.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Obama’s Failure In Iraq
Jun 12, 2014 Military, Political, Religion of Peace
Obama ran as a guy who opposed action in Iraq and he vowed to remove our troops from that country as soon as he could. Once he decided to leave he announced it to the world and he did not entertain ideas about leaving security forces to ensure the peace.
The man who has never run anything and who has no military experience was warned that announcing a departure date was stupid because the enemy would know when the chance of running into American forces would end. It had the end date.
The bad guys also knew that if none of our forces remained then they would be able to regroup and attack.
That has now all happened. Iraqis in many parts of the country are being attacked and murdered by the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Shams (Isis). That group is taking cities at a fast pace and leaving murder and mayhem in its path. The decapitated heads of policemen and soldiers line the streets of Mosul as the carnage continues.
Sharia Law is being imposed and anyone who refuses or breaks the law will be murdered.
This is what Barack Obama has given the people of Iraq and it is because of his ego. He thinks the world loves us because he is in charge. He thinks all he has to do is make nice and others will do the same. The enemy knows that America does not have the stomach to recommit troops to Iraq after many years of war and it is taking advantage of our (Obama’s) weakness.
Members of Congress who fought in Iraq are wondering aloud what the point of their (indicating our armed forces) effort was if Obama was just going to allow it to disintegrate into chaos.
Joe Biden once said that Iraq was one of Obama’s great achievements. Well how great is the achievement now that hundreds of thousands of Iraqis are being displaced and untold numbers are being murdered?
I don’t know what can be done for Iraq short of sending military assistance (drones and air power) but it is a good bet that we will not be sending ground troops. I am not advocating that but I know even if it were one hundred percent right to do so Obama would not. That would be admitting that his policies and what he did all resulted in failure and Obama does not admit his mistakes.
I am curious how many Democrats will be screaming that we need to do something to help those folks after spending years screaming about our involvement there and saying we needed to get out. How long before they blame George W Bush for the chaos? [UPDATE: That did not take long]
During the last presidential election debates Mitt Romney said it would be a mistake to remove all our troops from Iraq.
How many more times do his past utterances, ones ridiculed by liberals, have to come to fruition before people who worship Obama realize Romney was right and Obama was wrong?
How long before people begin to realize he does not know what he is doing?
How long before they realize the Emperor has no clothes?
How many people in Iraq will be murdered because Obama is a weak inept leader with no real experience?
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: decapitated, failure, Iraq, isis, joe biden, lies, Obama, weakness
Between Barack And A Hard Place In Syria
Aug 29, 2013 Political
Barack Obama discussed the movement or use of chemical weapons in Syria as a red line that would be crossed and require action. The red line was crossed and now something has to be done or Obama will look like all talk and no action. He will lose face if he does not do something and this is of his own doing.
Obama is weighing options with regard to a military strike in Syria. He has not recalled Congress to get its approval for such an action and it appears as if he might not do so. The use of chemical weapons in Syria is not an attack on the US and there is not an imminent threat to this country so he is required to get Congressional approval for any military action.
Whether you agree with George Bush’s decision to go into Iraq or not he did get Congressional approval for the use of military force. No matter what the outcome or how one feels about it Bush did what he was supposed to do.
The reality is that if Obama strikes Syria then Syria and Iran will strike Israel. This will draw in players like Russia and China as well as the UK, France and the US. In other words, this situation is a powder keg with a short fuse that could result in World War III.
Obama is in a tight spot because of his mouth.
His Democrats are in a tight spot because after years of bashing Bush for actions in Iraq they are now faced with a nearly identical situation (and the WMD in Syria likely came from Iraq). These Democrats will have to rationalize any yes vote on military action because they all eventually expressed their disapproval.
When there was talk about going into Iran Joe Biden said he would push for impeachment of Bush if he did so without Congressional approval. Barack Obama said that the president could not use military force without congressional approval unless there was an attack on our country or a threat of imminent attack. Now he is pushing to do that which he said was illegal and that which his VP (who was a Senator at the time) said would cause him to push for impeachment.
How will Democrats reconcile the conflict between doing the exact opposite of what they railed about and their desire to keep Obama from looking weaker than he already looks to the rest of the world?
If Barack Obama orders military force be used in Syria without Congressional approval then the military has an obligation not to carry out the orders and Obama should be impeached. If anyone in the military carries out those orders they should be prosecuted for obeying unlawful orders.
If Obama calls on Congress and Congress gives the approval then we have to live with the consequences though Democrats will still have to explain how their change of heart was for national security and not to cover Obama’s rear end.
If Obama goes to Congress and does not get approval then he is stuck with his foot in his mouth looking like a paper tiger.
In addition, all the anti war, anti Bush protesters will have to show the same reaction to Obama as they did to Bush. To do otherwise would show their blatant anti American hypocrisy.
Keep in mind, Bush got approval from Congress.
Now it is time for the alleged Constitutional law professor to follow the Constitution.
I know why should he start now?
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: Bush, chemical weapons, constitution, Iran, Iraq, lies, Obama, Syria
Was Bush Right After All?
Aug 26, 2013 Political
And if he was will he get an apology from the left?
When the authority to use force in Iraq was granted there were about 19 items in the resolution and only three or so dealt with WMD. There was plenty of credible evidence that Iraq had WMD and used them. In fact we know he used nerve agent on his own people. Despite this evidence and despite a number of Democrats alleging that Saddam Hussein had WMD (when Clinton was president) many Democrats claimed they were lied to.
Yes, when we went into Iraq we failed to find chemical agents. This, the left told us, was proof that Bush lied just to get into a war. They conveniently ignored the Iraq General, Georges Sada, who said the WMD was moved to Syrian planes that had their seats removed. Hussein was able to use the aircraft under the guise of humanitarian aid to Syria.
There were people from the region who claimed the chemical agents were stored in several locations throughout Syria but this fell on deaf ears as liberals who voted for the use of force claimed that Bush lied about WMD. Even though WMD was only 3/19 of the items in the resolution the die was cast and Bush was a liar.
I wrote a number of times about the chemical agents being moved to Syria. I knew Hussein had them and there was no intelligence showing that he had destroyed them but plenty of evidence that he had moved them. His general confirmed they went to Syria.
Liberals took me to task as they bought into the claims that Bush lied.
Well my friends, chemical agents have been used in Syria. There are accusations flowing from the government and from the rebels with each side blaming the other. That will all be sorted out but one thing is clear, nerve agents were used to kill innocent civilians. To be specific Sarin was used.
Hmm, Sarin. Isn’t that what Saddam Hussein had?
If chemical agents are being used in Syria then where did they come from? I would like the inspectors who are there investigating to have access to all the places where the Syrian government might be storing chemical agents (particularly the places claimed in the information provided years ago) so we can see what kind of markings are on them. My bet is that they will show that those agents came from Iraq.
I also bet they will show that they originated in Russia. I have written in the past that the Russians provided the agents to Iraq and that Russian trucks were the ones seen at the storage sites. The Russians were interested in helping get them out of country before we invaded so they would not be caught. Now the Russians are blocking efforts in the recent investigation into the Sarin use in Syria. The UN is helping block efforts as well.
It would be very interesting to see how this plays out if chemical agents are found and they came from Iraq (if the UN would even report the truth). It would be very interesting to see how many on the left who called George W. Bush a liar would apologize.
Hell, who am I kidding? Barack Obama and his liberal gang of thieves would use the revelations to blame Bush for what happened.
They will do anything to deflect attention from the mess they started in Syria.
That entire mess belongs to Barack Obama. He is responsible for it and he is culpable in the deaths of those who were gassed with Sarin.
Not that you will ever hear it from the Obama media.
Cave canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
Tags: Bush, chemical agents, Iraq, lies, Obama, sarin, Syria, WMD
If I Voted For McCain…
Mar 19, 2011 Political
…I was told I would be getting a third term of George W. Bush.
I voted for Sarah Palin, same result though as Barack Obama has now used military force in Libya to help topple a dictator who is slaughtering his people. That is what George Bush did in Iraq and the left was vehemently opposed. We were told that it was a quagmire and that we were nation building, all things the left opposes. Barack Obama was not in the Senate at the time as he was busy voting present in Illinois but he did assure us he would have voted against military action in Iraq.
I guess the people of Iraq who were being murdered by a brutal dictator do not carry the same weight as those in Libya. Oh I know, Bush talked about weapons of mass destruction but that was only about three of the twenty or so items in the authorization for force but why let the others get in the way of lefties screaming and hollering over military action.
Despite what Obama claimed and how superior he was supposed to be, it looks like he is a lot like George Bush in certain areas and this is not sitting well with his base. Drudge has this on his front page:
MARCH 19, 2011
OBAMA: ‘Today we are part of a broad coalition. We are answering the calls of a threatened people. And we are acting in the interests of the United States and the world’…MARCH 19, 2003
BUSH: ‘American and coalition forces are in the early stages of military operations to disarm Iraq, to free its people and to defend the world from grave danger’…
Let us see how the left handles Mr. Obama and his blatant aggression against another nation. I mean, who is he to tell the leader of another country what to do? Isn’t that what he and everyone like him screamed about with regard to Bush?
I doubt that we will send troops into Libya but we have launched missiles into that country and that is an act of aggression.
So where is Code Pink? Where are the left wing loonies and their cries over this aggression?
My guess is they are oblivious to it because their messiah Obama is the one doing it. They did not mind when Clinton launched missiles and they do not mind Obama doing it.
The D after their names allows them to do such things.
Cave Canem!
Never surrender, never submit.
[tip]If you enjoy what you read consider signing up to receive email notification of new posts. There are several options in the sidebar and I am sure you can find one that suits you. If you prefer, consider adding this site to your favorite feed reader. If you receive emails and wish to stop them follow the instructions included in the email.[/tip]