Quote Originally Posted by El Kabong View Post
Speaking of WMDs

Sunni Extremists in Iraq Occupy Saddam Hussein's Chemical Weapons Facility - WSJ

and

Iraq crisis: Isis jihadists 'seize Saddam Hussein's chemical weapons stockpile' - live - Telegraph


Chemical weapons you say? In Iraq you say? Hmmm, funny that


And for interested parties the Generals don't lose wars for Super Powers, POLITICIANS DO

And I'm speaking directly about these chickenshits who turned tail and ran after the Supreme Court made it's decision on Florida's Presidential votes in 2000
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RhZ2ZvS2t_E


But it's too much to ask for those assholes to be intellectually honest, I mean hell look at Global Cooling/Warming/Climate Change....their goal is to be Political winners not leaders

Chemical weapons are not weapons of mass destruction. And these chemical weapons were put under UN seal and permanent inspection regime as part of the 1991 surrender treaty. They managed to remain under seal until now when the jihadis got their hands on them. Luckily Iraq's chemical weapons programme was so primitive they'll have been useless twenty years ago.

As usual right wing media outlets are out to spread disinformation and as usual the people who can be relied upon to fall for any bullshit they're offered eat it up.

Also, too. Obama isn't reponsible for there being no American troops in Iraq. Bush is. In the summer of 2008 Bush was presented with two options by the Iraqi government. All US troops out by the end of 2008 or all troops out by the end of 2011. Bush chose the least humiliating option and avoided being publicly humiliated at the handover by sending his VP to sustain the embarrassment.





What the GOP are blaming Obama for at the minute is failing to renegotiate an agreement that Bush signed up to and the Iraqis had zero interest in renegotiatiing. So as far as politicians losing wars go, the Iraq war was fought and lost including the surrender handover to the Iranians all on Bush's watch.