So I guess George W Bush was right all along

[Hugabear]

After all, he got rid of a brutal dictator who was murdering his own people. Hell, he even got the UN to back him up, to give him the authorization to use 'necessary measures'. He even had a handful of countries to back him up.

The only thing missing are claims of Libyan WMDs, although that was just the pretext Bush used to get us into Iraq. The real objective was to overthrow Saddam and install a friendlier government. Kinda like what's going on now, except now its ok.

[SpartanDem]

1. When did the UN back Bush?

its bullshit and you know it the UN never authorized force. If you're gonna lie at least tell a good one.

[Fuzz]

2. I don't remember that either.

[The_Casual_Observer]

7. There were plenty of resolutions, no fly & all sorts of other shit.

[joshcryer]

12. Yes, some argue that the 1991 resolutions still applied for invasion... but 2003 UN did not...

...in fact enable an invasion.

[Fuzz]

14. But they did not agree to an invasion. /sigh

That's a right wing bullshit talking point.

[The_Casual_Observer]

16. You figure there isn't going to be an invasion after this shit?

[Fuzz]

20. I realize I've had a couple martinis, but I do think you are the one not following here.

You were saying that Iraq violated old UN sanctions, which supported Bush, in post 7. I responded that the UN did not sanction an invasion of Iraq and that the UN resolutions from 10+ years earlier were used for justification, as well as other lies, for an invasion of Iraq, IRAQ. Though the UN seems to be behind military action in Libya, I still do not support it, but using the UN to justify the Iraq invasion is right wing bullshit.

I hope that makes sense.

[joshcryer]

11. This meme has been perpetuated all day! Geez!

[Puregonzo1188]

21. If they did would that have made the Iraq war right in your mind?

[SpartanDem]

33. Does Iraq actually have WMD?

[ingac70]

28. +1

[WHEN CRABS ROAR]

3. And yes it is because they have oil.

[ProSense]

4. " Hell, he even got the UN to back him up" Actually

Bush was and is still wrong.

Oposition to invasion

<...>

There were serious legal questions surrounding the launching of the war against Iraq and the Bush Doctrine of preemptive war in general. On September 16, 2004, Kofi Annan, the Secretary General of the United Nations, said of the invasion, "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN Charter. From our point of view, from the Charter point of view, it was illegal."

<...>

Also, unlike Bush's illegal invasion, the Arab league backs the no-fly zone.

There is no comparison.

[joshcryer]

10. +1, ProSense! He had to get congressional approval because the UN didn't back him!

[The_Casual_Observer]

5. Bush had the balls to have a presser, this guy is no place to be seen.

[Bluerthanblue]

13. if you are talking about Pres. Obama- he had one yesterday at

2:00.

:thumbsdown:

[ProSense]

15. Bush's balls were impressive? "This guy"?

President Obama gave a press conference yesterday at 2:00 p.m. and another today.

Transcripts: here and here.

[Name removed]

18. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[ProSense]

19. "Those mealy shit obtuse remarks?"

Why you preferred the Saddam, 9/11, WMD link?

"He fuck starts another god damn war on that basis? You support this utter shit?"

No he didn't "fuck starts" another war. Take the time to grasp the facts.

[Bluerthanblue]

26. "mealy shit obtuse remarks"

guess you'd know em when you see em eh?

:shrug:

maybe being proven wrong pisses you off.

[aquart]

6. Saddam hadn't mass murdered for ten to twenty years.

Gaddafi is doing it this week. GET A GRIP.

[The_Casual_Observer]

8. Oh brother.

[joshcryer]

9. IT IS UNTRUE HE DID NOT GET UN TO BACK HIM UP! The UN gave a vote for inspectors to return!

[truedelphi]

24. Thank you for the reality check.

I seemed to remember that being the case.

i also remember listening to the alternate media (Pacifica radio) and hearing delegates from nations all over the earth as they recited so many beautiful and heart wrenching poems, speeches, etc on the horrors of war and how awful it would be if the USA went plundering and murdering in Iraq.

And over the years, everything those people said turned out to be true. (One of the most chillingly beautiful speeches came from the delegate to the UN from Vietnam.)

[Maru Kitteh]

25. But Smush Bimbo and Bent Peck told me that Bush II had the full UN backing!

I'm just lost now.

[Angry Dragon]

17. ...........

:popcorn:

[opihimoimoi]

22. No one alive can touch That POS.....W Bush is an asshole super Moon size

[IsItJustMe]

23. You hit the nail right square on the head there.

I remember the heated and passionate debate that was going on here at DU back then. People were really haten on Bush. Now there is no passion at all, either for or against.

Maybe we are immuned and apathetic from it all by now, or maybe there is hypocrisy involves. My guess is both.

[Bluerthanblue]

27. no passion at all?

for or against?

I don't think we're reading the same board!

[IsItJustMe]

31. Relative to what was taking place back then.

[Bluerthanblue]

34. I've been here awhile-

and seen quite a bit of passion.

I don't see any lack of passion here, for either side of this issue.

[ingac70]

30. If you call outright lying "hitting the nail on the head.".

The UN didn't back Bush.

[HEyHEY]

37. Maybe cause, Libya's a different country and this is a different situation

[ingac70]

29. I am totally pissed the US is involved in this, but that is no reason to LIE....

and say the UN backed up Bush on Iraq. Holy shit people.

[NYC Liberal]

32. Bush "got the UN to back him up"? Horseshit. And you know it. nt

[markpkessinger]

35. I don't necessarily support the intervention in Libya, but...

...there is at least an arguable case to be made that constraining Qaddafi's ability to retaliate against his own people is a genuine humanitarian good. Indeed, I have a feeling that the hindsight of the Clinton administration over having been passive in the face of the Rwandan genocide probably influenced Secretary Clinton, and she, in turn, the President. The comparison with Iraq fails because the Iraqi people were not in the midst of an attempt to overthrow Saddam Hussein.

The bigger question I have,though, is that if it is a humanitarian good to intervene militarily to stop Qaddafi from attacking his own citizens, why should it not be equally a humanitarian good to do the same with respect to the government of Bahrain? But such moral clarity isn't exactly this administration's strong suit.

[HEyHEY]

36. Since when has Libya refused to sell oil?