Megyn Kelly "Backhands" Dick Cheney

[Zaac]

Megyn Kelly to Dick Cheney: "Time and Time Again, History Has Proven You Got It Wrong" on Iraq

MEGYN KELLY: In your op-ed, you write as follows: 'Rarely has a U.S. president been so wrong about so much at the expense of so many. But time and time again, history has proven that you got it wrong as well, sir. You said there were no doubts that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction. You said we would be greeted as liberators. You said the Iraq insurgency was in its last throes back in 2005. And you said after our intervention, extremists would have to "rethink their strategy of jihad." Now with almost a trillion dollars spent there with 4,500 American lives lost there, what do you say to those who say you were so wrong about so much at the expense of so many?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vi...tory_has_proven_you_got_it_wrong_on_iraq.html

Hilarious. :flower:

 

[poncho]

Neocons will just keep repeating the same old mantra.

We never said that! We never did that! It just ain't true! "And if you point to that huge mountain of evidence that proves we did say and do all those things we'll just call you an unpatriotic conspiracy theorist liberal moonbat that's putting the country in danger!"

 

[SolaSaint]

When Kelly is blaming Cheney, she needs to include all the liberals who agreed with what was going on at the time. It wasn't just Bush/Cheney that put us into the Iraq war.

 

[poncho]

“After two hours of most vigorous debate among those in attendance, the meeting adjourned with second revised draft Bills of Impeachment sitting on the table.”

Professor Boyle said to former Attorney General Ramsey Clark on the way out of the building after the two hour debate:

“Ramsey, I don’t understand it. Why didn’t those people take me up on my offer to stick around, polish up my draft bills of impeachment, and put them in there right away in order to head off this war?

“And Ramsey replied: ‘I think most of the people there want a war.’”

And, Indeed, they did. John Podesta representing the Democratic National Committed told Conyers that the Democratic Party did not want Conyers to pursue the impeachment effort. Instead, the Democratic Party wanted to give Republicans Bush and Cheney their war on Iraq so that the Democrats would fare better in the national elections in 2004. Think about that, not just the stupidity of the Democratic Party–whenever has a party at war been in danger of electoral defeat? Look and see! Here is the spokesman for the Democratic Party telling Conyers: “Don’t prevent a war, because we will benefit politically from it. Let the Iraqi people die. Let our soldiers die. We Democrats will benefit from it.”

Read More At: http://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2014/06/17/professor-francis-boyle-impeachment-bush-obama/

 

[SolaSaint]

One also has to wonder where Iraq would be today if we would have stayed out? I know we would have 4500 men and women still alive but would the world be any safer? Don't know, maybe it is worse since ISIS now has weapons. And we must also wonder where are the WMD that mysteriously left Iraq? We know they existed no matter how loud Bush haters shout about it. :wavey:

 

[Crabtownboy]

When Kelly is blaming Cheney, she needs to include all the liberals who agreed with what was going on at the time. It wasn't just Bush/Cheney that put us into the Iraq war.

Who gave the order sending our troops into harms way?

 

[Don]

Congress, when it gave the president permission to do so.

 

[Crabtownboy]

Congress, when it gave the president permission to do so.

Not true. No troops can move into combat until the Commander-In-Chief, the president, give the order. Congress gives permission only.

 

[Crabtownboy]

One also has to wonder where Iraq would be today if we would have stayed out? I know we would have 4500 men and women still alive but would the world be any safer? Don't know, maybe it is worse since ISIS now has weapons. And we must also wonder where are the WMD that mysteriously left Iraq? We know they existed no matter how loud Bush haters shout about it. :wavey:

And over 45,000 men and women unscared, unharmed due to war injuries, many with lives completely ruined, and the VA would not be overrun with so many soldiers needing help.

http://icasualties.org/Iraq/USCasualtiesByState.aspx

 

[Don]

Not true. No troops can move into combat until the Commander-In-Chief, the president, give the order. Congress gives permission only.

And the president didn't have the authority to give the order until Congress gave him permission.

THAT is the greatness of our "checks-and-balances" system - no one single person is actually to blame. Blame is shared equally amongst all the responsible parties.

 

[Revmitchell]

​

Not true. No troops can move into combat until the Commander-In-Chief, the president, give the order. Congress gives permission only.

Only in the far left extreme liberal mind are these two things different.

 

[Crabtownboy]

​

Only in the far left extreme liberal mind are these two things different.

ROFL. Surely you jest.

Congress cannot give our military an order to enter combat. No troops can move until the president gives the order.

Even if Congress passes a declaration of war no troops can act until ordered to do so by their commander-in-chief.

 

[Crabtownboy]

And the president didn't have the authority to give the order until Congress gave him permission.

THAT is the greatness of our "checks-and-balances" system - no one single person is actually to blame. Blame is shared equally amongst all the responsible parties.

I agree. But the actual order is from the president.

 

[Zaac]

Congress, when it gave the president permission to do so.

The buck stops with the Comander-in-Chief when it comes to sending troops to war.

The same applied with Bush as applies with Obama.

 

[Bro. Curtis]

ROFL. Surely you jest.

Congress cannot give our military an order to enter combat. No troops can move until the president gives the order.

Even if Congress passes a declaration of war no troops can act until ordered to do so by their commander-in-chief.

Why is it so important to you that Bush bears the full blame for the war ?

 

[Bro. Curtis]

The buck stops with the Comander-in-Chief when it comes to sending troops to war.

The same applied with Bush as applies with Obama.

Obama has actually bypassed congress on some of his military adventures.

 

[Don]

The buck stops with the Comander-in-Chief when it comes to sending troops to war.

The same applied with Bush as applies with Obama.

Military commanders are duty-bound to disobey a commander-in-chief who gives an order to go to war without congressional authorization; in other words, an order that isn't within the legal authority of that position.

The same does apply: both Bush and Obama, AND the congresses that gave them authority under the laws of our nation, are responsible.