Would John McCain Have Took The U.S. Into Iraq if He Won in 2000?

[Derek]

He wouldn't have had to. Saddam would've cooperated with him the same as he would have with Reagan.

[Derek]

He wouldn't have had to. Saddam would've cooperated with him the same as he would have with Reagan.

I agree about McCain not invading Iraq, but keep in mind that Saddam also cooperated with Bush Jr. (by allowing the U.N. inspectors to return to Iraq), yet Bush Jr. proceeded to invade Iraq anyway.

That's due to what he thought was harboring terrorists and killing the innocent. I don't think it was really ever about the WMD. Sometimes scare tactics are the only way to get liberals to support something though.

[Derek]

And as far as we know Saddam ws playing hide and seek with the inspectors by moving the weapons around. We have found WMD but it hasn't been reported on the news other than a few seconds of clips here and there. It's not like the liberal media wants voters to think Iraq was justified.

[Derek]

And as far as we know Saddam ws playing hide and seek with the inspectors by moving the weapons around. We have found WMD but it hasn't been reported on the news other than a few seconds of clips here and there. It's not like the liberal media wants voters to think Iraq was justified.

There were no WMDs in Iraq. I never saw a news story proving there were WMDs in Iraq after the invasion. And the media is not liberal--it was biased in favor of Reagan twice, Bush Sr. in 1988, and Bush Jr. twice.

92% of the press voted for Kerry and only 6% for Bush. Look it up. There is absolutely no way anyone can rationally believe the press to be anything but liberal. Fox News does better than the liberal media as far as ratings because they are more in touch with ordinary Americans and therefore more Americans want to watch.

[Derek]

Regardless, I think McCain would've been better qualified to handle Iraq if need be.

[Derek]

And as far as we know Saddam ws playing hide and seek with the inspectors by moving the weapons around. We have found WMD but it hasn't been reported on the news other than a few seconds of clips here and there. It's not like the liberal media wants voters to think Iraq was justified.

There were no WMDs in Iraq. I never saw a news story proving there were WMDs in Iraq after the invasion. And the media is not liberal--it was biased in favor of Reagan twice, Bush Sr. in 1988, and Bush Jr. twice.

92% of the press voted for Kerry and only 6% for Bush. Look it up. There is absolutely no way anyone can rationally believe the press to be anything but liberal. Fox News does better than the liberal media as far as ratings because they are more in touch with ordinary Americans and therefore more Americans want to watch.

This has to be a joke.  We all have to remember that the political "commentary" (more like entertainment) shows that hundreds of people watch it to get nothing more than a laugh.

not true

[Derek]

And as far as we know Saddam ws playing hide and seek with the inspectors by moving the weapons around. We have found WMD but it hasn't been reported on the news other than a few seconds of clips here and there. It's not like the liberal media wants voters to think Iraq was justified.

There were no WMDs in Iraq. I never saw a news story proving there were WMDs in Iraq after the invasion. And the media is not liberal--it was biased in favor of Reagan twice, Bush Sr. in 1988, and Bush Jr. twice.

92% of the press voted for Kerry and only 6% for Bush. Look it up. There is absolutely no way anyone can rationally believe the press to be anything but liberal. Fox News does better than the liberal media as far as ratings because they are more in touch with ordinary Americans and therefore more Americans want to watch.

This has to be a joke.  We all have to remember that the political "commentary" (more like entertainment) shows that hundreds of people watch it to get nothing more than a laugh.

not true

No, Archangel Zero is correct. Fox News is extremely biased. And I looked up your claim about 92% of the media voting for Kerry. I found absolutely nothing. In fact, the media consistenly critcized Gore and Kerry while giving Bush a free pass.

I'm going to die of a heart attack from laughing so hard.

[Derek]

Regardless, I think McCain would've been better qualified to handle Iraq if need be.

Of course. So would Gore have been better qualified. Neither of them would ahve launched a pointless war there like Bush did.

Gore would not have the people around him that Bush did to give such advice. The guys around Bush were brilliant; Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Ridge, his father, Condaleeza Rice.

[Derek]

Regardless, I think McCain would've been better qualified to handle Iraq if need be.

Of course. So would Gore have been better qualified. Neither of them would ahve launched a pointless war there like Bush did.

Gore would not have the people around him that Bush did to give such advice. The guys around Bush were brilliant; Cheney, Rumsfeld, Ashcroft, Ridge, his father, Condaleeza Rice.

ROFLMAO!!!!

What's so funny? Those were some hardcore warhawks.

[Derek]

Some of the side deals they made? How bout that?

[Derek]

me?

[Derek]

I don't think McCain would've done so but with the intelligence reports we had it was a must.

[Derek]

I don't think McCain would've done so but with the intelligence reports we had it was a must.

Bush manipulated the intelligence to make a stronger case for war in Iraq.

No he didn't. The president doesn't have much to do with intelligence reports unless he asks for them. We went to Iraq to bring freedom to the oppressed, promote WOMEN'S RIGHTS, build schools, build hospitals, remove a dictator, and make the world a better place.

[Derek]

I don't think McCain would've done so but with the intelligence reports we had it was a must.

Bush manipulated the intelligence to make a stronger case for war in Iraq.

No he didn't. The president doesn't have much to do with intelligence reports unless he asks for them. We went to Iraq to bring freedom to the oppressed, promote WOMEN'S RIGHTS, build schools, build hospitals, remove a dictator, and make the world a better place.

That's great and all, but it's a shame we had to have used our taxpayer money that we didn't even have (we were in a deficit even before Iraq) to do this. That money should have been used to pay down our debt. And if you're so eager about bringing freedom to oppressed people, then we should have invaded North Korea, Sudan, Iran, and Burma before invading Iraq. And we should have taxed the rich very heavily to do this so that we wouldn't increase our deficit and debt.

You democrats will jump at any opportunity you can to tax someone who makes a dime more than you. We lose lives at war and all you can think of is taxing someone who makes more money than you.

[Derek]

I don't think McCain would've done so but with the intelligence reports we had it was a must.

Bush manipulated the intelligence to make a stronger case for war in Iraq.

No he didn't. The president doesn't have much to do with intelligence reports unless he asks for them. We went to Iraq to bring freedom to the oppressed, promote WOMEN'S RIGHTS, build schools, build hospitals, remove a dictator, and make the world a better place.

That's great and all, but it's a shame we had to have used our taxpayer money that we didn't even have (we were in a deficit even before Iraq) to do this. That money should have been used to pay down our debt. And if you're so eager about bringing freedom to oppressed people, then we should have invaded North Korea, Sudan, Iran, and Burma before invading Iraq. And we should have taxed the rich very heavily to do this so that we wouldn't increase our deficit and debt.

You democrats will jump at any opportunity you can to tax someone who makes a dime more than you. We lose lives at war and all you can think of is taxing someone who makes more money than you.

No, we just care about actually balancing the budget to make sure that our children have a better future and not be burdened by the massive amounts of debt that this generation has accumulated. And if a President starts a war, they better be prepared to pay for it. You Republicans are hypocrites. You claim to be fiscal conservatives yet you spend like crazy when you come into power.

You sound uneducated and assumptive. I never said that I spend like Bush did. Stop using our children for your political advancements too. You democrats are ALL THE SAME. You hide behind America's youth after you can't sell your policies to those with an IQ above 35.

[Derek]

I don't think McCain would've done so but with the intelligence reports we had it was a must.

Bush manipulated the intelligence to make a stronger case for war in Iraq.

No he didn't. The president doesn't have much to do with intelligence reports unless he asks for them. We went to Iraq to bring freedom to the oppressed, promote WOMEN'S RIGHTS, build schools, build hospitals, remove a dictator, and make the world a better place.

That's great and all, but it's a shame we had to have used our taxpayer money that we didn't even have (we were in a deficit even before Iraq) to do this. That money should have been used to pay down our debt. And if you're so eager about bringing freedom to oppressed people, then we should have invaded North Korea, Sudan, Iran, and Burma before invading Iraq. And we should have taxed the rich very heavily to do this so that we wouldn't increase our deficit and debt.

You democrats will jump at any opportunity you can to tax someone who makes a dime more than you. We lose lives at war and all you can think of is taxing someone who makes more money than you.

No, we just care about actually balancing the budget to make sure that our children have a better future and not be burdened by the massive amounts of debt that this generation has accumulated. And if a President starts a war, they better be prepared to pay for it. You Republicans are hypocrites. You claim to be fiscal conservatives yet you spend like crazy when you come into power.

You sound uneducated and assumptive. I never said that I spend like Bush did. Stop using our children for your political advancements too. You democrats are ALL THE SAME. You hide behind America's youth after you can't sell your policies to those with an IQ above 35.

I was talking about Republican politicians. And last time I checked, the Democratic Party won the last elections. Thus, the Democratic polciies can appeal to the majority of American voters.

No that's only people below the age of 24. It wasn't Obama's socialist ideas either. He won because he was the furthest candidate from Bush.

[Derek]

You democrats will jump at any opportunity you can to tax someone who makes a dime more than you. We lose lives at war and all you can think of is taxing someone who makes more money than you.

No, we just care about actually balancing the budget to make sure that our children have a better future and not be burdened by the massive amounts of debt that this generation has accumulated. And if a President starts a war, they better be prepared to pay for it. You Republicans are hypocrites. You claim to be fiscal conservatives yet you spend like crazy when you come into power.

You sound uneducated and assumptive. I never said that I spend like Bush did. Stop using our children for your political advancements too. You democrats are ALL THE SAME. You hide behind America's youth after you can't sell your policies to those with an IQ above 35.

God Derek you talk out of both sides of your yesterday on a post yesterday you were talking about how we had to stop spending for the sake of our children, LOL.

I've been very consistent. Spend what's necessary. Don't hide behind America's youth to justify over spending and higher taxes. Stop saying that I said something if I didn't. Your post sounds vague.

Edited to remove off-topic discussion of personal IQs.

[Derek]

You are far from consistent.

In fact I think you're a closet Neocon.