Bush is Proved Right

[divemaster5734]

As much as I detest The Village Idiot, his words from 2007 are now coming true.

 

Probably because he already knew EXACTLY who these guys are, after all, his CIA trained them...DM

 

 

 

[boosterbglee]

Replaced by the Village dumb A**!  JMO!  

[Nelg]

He was correct in many of his decisions.  Like him or not, he was a leader.  

[Nadita]

He was correct in many of his decisions.  Like him or not, he was a leader.

Agree

[divemaster5734]

He was correct in many of his decisions.  Like him or not, he was a leader.  

 

If he wasn't a NWO CFR puppet, totally committed to eliminating 6 billion humans in order to preserve resources for the elitists, I guess he wasn't such a bad guy after all.

 

He definitely had a better presentation than ocrap, to be sure.

 

But then, it's always easier to present conservative based ideals, no matter how twisted or deceptive the truth was, because conservative ethics are embedded in logic.

 

Is much more difficult to sell rainbows and unicorns, guess that's why o gave up and went golfing... 

[doctor robbins]

Unfortunately Bush also signed the SOFA agreement in 2008 agreeing to have all US troops out by 2012. 

[sandfly]

THERE'S MORE TO IT DOC

[millionaire in training]

Yeap he was right.  And look at us now.

[Maggie123]

• And the question in my mind is how many additional American casualties is Saddam worth? And the answer is not very damned many. So I think we got it right, both when we decided to expel him from Kuwait, but also when the president made the decision that we'd achieved our objectives and we were not going to go get bogged down in the problems of trying to take over and govern Iraq.... Once we had rounded him up and gotten rid of his government, then the question is what do you put in its place? You know, you then have accepted the responsibility for governing Iraq.
  • August 1992, at the Discovery Institute in Seattle [2] [3]

Because if we had gone to Baghdad we would have been all alone. There wouldn't have been anybody else with us. It would have been a U.S. occupation of Iraq. None of the Arab forces that were willing to fight with us in Kuwait were willing to invade Iraq. Once you got to Iraq and took it over and took down Saddam Hussein's government, then what are you going to put in its place? That's a very volatile part of the world. And if you take down the central government in Iraq, you could easily end up seeing pieces of Iraq fly off. Part of it the Syrians would like to have, the west. Part of eastern Iraq the Iranians would like to claim. Fought over for eight years. In the north, you've got the Kurds. And if the Kurds spin loose and join with Kurds in Turkey, then you threaten the territorial integrity of Turkey. It's a quagmire if you go that far and try to take over Iraq. The other thing is casualties. Everyone was impressed with the fact that we were able to do our job with as few casualties as we had, but for the 146 Americans killed in action and for the families it wasn't a cheap war. And the question for the president in terms of whether or not we went on to Baghdad and took additional casualties in an effort to get Saddam Hussein was, how many additional dead Americans is Saddam worth? And our judgment was not very many, and I think we got it right.

• Cheney, on not pushing on to Baghdad during the first Gulf War; C-SPAN 4-15-94 Interview on CNN

[ronscarpa]

Thanks for posting the video Divemaster...(+1)   

[Nelg]

Unfortunately Bush also signed the SOFA agreement in 2008 agreeing to have all US troops out by 2012. 

 

The withdrawal agreement was not that all troops be removed from Iraq, but that all military fighting forces be removed.  Sounds contradictory.  But when al-Maliki and GW Bush finalized the agreement, the US was to maintain military advisers and special forces troops on the ground to make sure that Iraq remained stable and developed a democratically.  Plus, there were still terrorists that needed to be contained and trouble still brewing between the sectarian factions. 

The Defense Department made a recommendation that 10-20,000 troops remain in Iraq, but Obama and Maliki could not agree on this new “tweaking” of the SOFA, mainly because Iraq would not provide the US troops with “immunity from prosecution” by the Iraq judicial system.  Thus, Obama withdrew all the troops.

If he had stuck to what the Defense Department had recommended and insisted on these forces remaining, Maliki would have been pressured to accept the terms.  Obama failed in his negotiation attempt and Maliki won.  Thus, we have another failure on the part of this administration.   

[skeetdog]

Thanks divemaster...Yep, there was a lot involved and for the most part we got it right...and looking back. If left to our original POA we would probably we better off now worldwide, economically....There was a movement exposing Saddam regime and had the capacity to transform the government with the people to a free market.  The military heavily depended on information about the streets from these informants that supported a free Iraq. The uncertain control of this movement caused the removal of Sunni personnel from all military, executive or management level position. Iraq had a chance to work it out from within as soon as the military had Saddam's ears pinned to the barn door. Greed and Power were the reasons to take advantage of the greatest rip off in history and Maliki and his cronies' will foot the bill for being played the ''Puppet'' by the ones that profited billions on forming the new Iraqi Government...

[PartyTime]

He was correct in many of his decisions.  Like him or not, he was a leader.  

 

He was not a leader in the least bit. He is no different than any other President. They are merely puppets who take their marching orders from the real power that sits behind the throne. They are just pawns put out in front before the general public made to appear and look as if they are the leaders. And as history has shown, whenever any puppet goes against their marching orders in opposition of the power behind their throne, they are removed permanently. It's all staged to give an illusion that allows the few behind the throne to control the world and enslave them allowing the few to suck off the populace like vampires sucking the life blood out its victims. They are nothing but a bunch of Satan's minions who sold their souls in exchange for being given all the worldly kingdoms to rule over. You know, all the worldly kingdoms Satan tried to get Jesus to accept.

[Maggie123]

He was not a leader in the least bit. He is no different than any other President. They are merely puppets who take their marching orders from the real power that sits behind the throne. They are just pawns put out in front before the general public made to appear and look as if they are the leaders. And as history has shown, whenever any puppet goes against their marching orders in opposition of the power behind their throne, they are removed permanently. It's all staged to give an illusion that allows the few behind the throne to control the world and enslave them allowing the few to suck off the populace like vampires sucking the life blood out its victims. They are nothing but a bunch of Satan's minions who sold their souls in exchange for being given all the worldly kingdoms to rule over. You know, all the worldly kingdoms Satan tried to get Jesus to accept.

 

 

EXACTLY!!! Thank You For Your True Words PartyTime... Much Appreciated.

[MyLadiesDaddy]

Party time

And the truly sad part is that most of the world will follow Satan's minions straight to

Hell.

PRAY FOR REVIVAL EVERYDAY

[Nelg]

He was not a leader in the least bit. He is no different than any other President. They are merely puppets who take their marching orders from the real power that sits behind the throne. They are just pawns put out in front before the general public made to appear and look as if they are the leaders. And as history has shown, whenever any puppet goes against their marching orders in opposition of the power behind their throne, they are removed permanently. It's all staged to give an illusion that allows the few behind the throne to control the world and enslave them allowing the few to suck off the populace like vampires sucking the life blood out its victims. They are nothing but a bunch of Satan's minions who sold their souls in exchange for being given all the worldly kingdoms to rule over. You know, all the worldly kingdoms Satan tried to get Jesus to accept.

Leadership comes in many packages. There have been good ones and bad ones all across the centuries.  Even some of the leaders that the God chose lost their moorings and became bad.  Decisions are based upon who the individual desires to follow.  It is either the those things that will help the people or those things that are "vampirish" and that suck the life out of people.  

I would say from your comments that you would believe that no leader, president, king, ruler, etc. anywhere in the world or any time in history would not meet with your standards of leadership.  I would like to here your definition of a leader. 

Certainly no leader can be compared with the rule of Jesus Christ in His kingdom. He is the only King I follow or will ever follow.  Before I do anything I seek His will in what I do.  But I do follow the leadership of this earthly realm.  "Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every human institution: whether to a king as the one in authority; or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.  For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men. Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but as bondslaves of God."

[Lutie]

If he wasn't a NWO CFR puppet, totally committed to eliminating 6 billion humans in order to preserve resources for the elitists, I guess he wasn't such a bad guy after all.

 

He definitely had a better presentation than ocrap, to be sure.

 

But then, it's always easier to present conservative based ideals, no matter how twisted or deceptive the truth was, because conservative ethics are embedded in logic.

 

Is much more difficult to sell rainbows and unicorns, guess that's why o gave up and went golfing... 

LOL you are so full of (let me be clear)  crap!     

[doctor robbins]

The withdrawal agreement was not that all troops be removed from Iraq, but that all military fighting forces be removed.  Sounds contradictory.  But when al-Maliki and GW Bush finalized the agreement, the US was to maintain military advisers and special forces troops on the ground to make sure that Iraq remained stable and developed a democratically.  Plus, there were still terrorists that needed to be contained and trouble still brewing between the sectarian factions. 

The Defense Department made a recommendation that 10-20,000 troops remain in Iraq, but Obama and Maliki could not agree on this new “tweaking” of the SOFA, mainly because Iraq would not provide the US troops with “immunity from prosecution” by the Iraq judicial system.  Thus, Obama withdrew all the troops.

If he had stuck to what the Defense Department had recommended and insisted on these forces remaining, Maliki would have been pressured to accept the terms.  Obama failed in his negotiation attempt and Maliki won.  Thus, we have another failure on the part of this administration.   

 

You raise some interesting points.  You're right about the specific wording.  Maybe I should have elaborated.  There were a few hundred military advisers after the troop withdrawal.  It wasn't the 10-20,000 that the Defense Department recommended but given the political climate in the US and Iraq it wasn't likely that Bush could have struck a better arrangement.  There were too many abuses by US troops for the Iraqis to grant immunity and the American people were tired of the war and wanted out, which is one of the reasons Obama was elected.  The main point that I was addressing is that this video clip of Bush was from 2007 when he was promoting his surge policy.  A year later the surge had gone so well Bush felt comfortable signing the SOFA agreement for a pullout by the end of 2011.  This is what Bush said when he announced the SOFA agreement in November of 2008.

 

The Strategic Framework Agreement sets the foundation for a long-term bilateral relationship between our two countries, and the Security Agreement addresses our presence, activities, and withdrawal from Iraq. Today’s vote affirms the growth of Iraq’s democracy and increasing ability to secure itself. We look forward to a swift approval by Iraq’s Presidency Council.  Two years ago, this day seemed unlikely – but the success of the surge and the courage of the Iraqi people set the conditions for these two agreements to be negotiated and approved by the Iraqi parliament. The improved conditions on the ground and the parliamentary approval of these two agreements serve as a testament to the Iraqi, Coalition, and American men and women, both military and civilian, who paved the way for this day

 

 

If FOX News is suggesting that Bush wanted to stay and fight but Obama pulled all the troops out and now all hell is breaking loose they are completely misrepresenting what happened.  Personally I feel that Bush was pushing to get this done prior to the 2008 election in an effort to steal some of Obama's thunder and maybe help the Republicans keep the White House, but the Iraqis weren't willing to cooperate.  Whether that's the case or not Bush did sign an agreement that was carried out during the Obama administration.  Also, many of the Iraqis who joined ISIS did so because of the shortsightedness of the CPA in their de-baathification of the Iraqi military, and Obama had nothing to do with that.   

Edited September 6, 2014 by doctor robbins

[sxsess]

If Bush was a village idiot than Obummer is dumbest, stupidest, SOB to ever sh*t between 2 shoes.

[Nelg]

Whatever the situation was during the making and completion of the SOFA, the situation now demands a rethinking and a "different" agreement for today.  Unless there is a change and troops are "on the ground" ISSL/ISIS/IS will have an advantage and will eventually take the country.  

Certainly air support and power are needed, but there is nothing (at present) that can replace troops and direct battle conflict with the terrorists.  Yes, lives will be lost, but those are the realities of war.  I hate war with a passion.  It goes against all that I believe to be civil and right and moral.  Peace in this world will never be achieved as long as there are people bent on forcing their way on people. There will be wars and rumors of wars and people will die.  But if we allow the rape of a nation by evil men or the extermination of a people simply because they are of a different belief or different political view point, we will be encouraging evil and not stopping it.  

God help us to make the correct decision.

[divemaster5734]

He was not a leader in the least bit. He is no different than any other President. They are merely puppets who take their marching orders from the real power that sits behind the throne. They are just pawns put out in front before the general public made to appear and look as if they are the leaders. And as history has shown, whenever any puppet goes against their marching orders in opposition of the power behind their throne, they are removed permanently. It's all staged to give an illusion that allows the few behind the throne to control the world and enslave them allowing the few to suck off the populace like vampires sucking the life blood out its victims. They are nothing but a bunch of Satan's minions who sold their souls in exchange for being given all the worldly kingdoms to rule over. You know, all the worldly kingdoms Satan tried to get Jesus to accept.

 

That's pretty much what I meant, I'm just running out of the energy to make similar statements every time I post.

 

Which is why I honestly appreciate it when you jump in to clarify and support.

 

Isn't it amazing, while almost every reply to this post was confirmation to one degree or another, I'm the one the troll decided to antagonize.

 

I'll just ignore the feckless dolt, maybe they'll find a Christian post to disrupt.

 

How have you been PT? haven't seen you in some time.

[pluMmet]

If he wasn't a NWO CFR puppet, totally committed to eliminating 6 billion humans in order to preserve resources for the elitists,

 

 

I have been thinking a great deal about that concept and am well aware of The Georgia Stones.

 

As I ponder the idea that "they " want "us" dead (I am not doubting that there is a they) it occurs to me how increadibly simple it is to kill 6 billion people with Money, Resources and Technology.

 

For instance the above ground stocks of silver are worth only a few billion dollars (at current prices.) There are over 1000 people in this world that can buy all of it.

 

If any one of these people desired they could set up a few shell companies that seemed legitamate to compartmentalize their employies and create bio weapons to kill as many of the earths population they wished. It would cost them much less then the world silver supply.

 

I have begun thinking that these "rules" we hear they have for themselves must include not doing any actual harm themselves or directly telling anyone kill any one. They use fear and confusion as a tool as well as using money to foster people who have the worst thinking to create an enviornment were people kill each other and themselves. They will happily sell you the knife and say how great an idea it is for you to slit your wrists.

 

It's to the point now that I'd bet my hat that at the very least they are trying very hard not to kill or directly have anyone killed as that makes their goal all that much more desirable if they don't do any of that and still reach it.

 

They see themselves as Troglodytes, people who do their killing and bidding as Morlocks and the rest as Eloi (aka sheeple)

 

Wont they be supprised if next to no one riots in the face of what they have planned. If most people just make due with what they have. Then they will be forced to either give up their plans or become the monsters they have tried to make us become

[Maggie123]

I have been thinking a great deal about that concept and am well aware of The Georgia Stones.

 

As I ponder the idea that "they " want "us" dead (I am not doubting that there is a they) it occurs to me how incredibly simple it is to kill 6 billion people with Money, Resources and Technology.

 

For instance the above ground stocks of silver are worth only a few billion dollars (at current prices.) There are over 1000 people in this world that can buy all of it.

 

If any one of these people desired they could set up a few shell companies that seemed legitamate to compartmentalize their employies and create bio weapons to kill as many of the earths population they wished. It would cost them much less then the world silver supply.

 

I have begun thinking that these "rules" we hear they have for themselves must include not doing any actual harm themselves or directly telling anyone kill any one. They use fear and confusion as a tool as well as using money to foster people who have the worst thinking to create an enviornment were people kill each other and themselves. They will happily sell you the knife and say how great an idea it is for you to slit your wrists.

 

It's to the point now that I'd bet my hat that at the very least they are trying very hard not to kill or directly have anyone killed as that makes their goal all that much more desirable if they don't do any of that and still reach it.

 

They see themselves as Troglodytes, people who do their killing and bidding as Morlocks and the rest as Eloi (aka sheeple)

 

Wont they be supprised if next to no one riots in the face of what they have planned. If most people just make due with what they have. Then they will be forced to either give up their plans or become the monsters they have tried to make us become

 

Good Post PluMmet... Agreed.... I really like your conclusion.

 

"They see themselves as Troglodytes, people who do their killing and bidding as Morlocks and the rest as Eloi (aka sheeple)"

 

Those terms are vaguely familiar to me... just can't place where they come from???

[pluMmet]

Good Post PluMmet... Agreed.... I really like your conclusion.

 

"They see themselves as Troglodytes, people who do their killing and bidding as Morlocks and the rest as Eloi (aka sheeple)"

 

Those terms are vaguely familiar to me... just can't place where they come from???

 

George Orwell - The Time Machine

[Maggie123]

George Orwell - The Time Machine

 

OH Yeah!!!! That's Right!!! Thanks PluMmet... it was driving me crazy trying to remember.

 

That was a great movie!!! Scared the gajeebers out of me when I was a kid.