Are Trump supporters Bush supporters?

For a moment, your post sounded like you were attacking Abraham Lincoln and not GW Bush.

Bush was following the Democratic party agenda.

Abe on the other hand did wage an unnecessary war that was and still remains our worst disaster ever.

We as a nation had so much help in the Iraq war it dazzles me how ignorant Democrats truly are.

The terms double and triple get misused all the time by Democrats. Rather than use actual numbers, they glorify percentages.

Actually since i am using Medicare plan D, I am in the best place to tell you all about it.

What holds down pharmacy prices. Well your insurance firms love to pay lower prices. They actually do bargain down costs of drugs. They do not force the Feds to meddle.

Democrats loathe the free market yet enjoy daily the benefits, such as what you get from Amazon.com and Costco stores and of course Walmart. Were those Federal stores, you would pay steep taxes just for them to exist and lack a bit of control over any of them.

 

I am more of a voter than what you call a supporter.
1. Trump annoys me all the time with his rhetoric. He can save it for the campaign. His very loyal fan base loves his rallies. I voted for him yet never spent one instant at any of his rallies.
2. I base my support on actual creative acts by Trump. If he shut up, i suppose we should see the media lauding him, but they decided in 2016 they never would laud the man.
3. i still am not happy that Bush 41 raised taxes.
4. Reagan did curtail taxes but the most vital cuts were called the ACRS. Reagan created a new system that spurred investing by so much, the economy regained it's health. Few speak of the ACRS other than myself. Why me? I recall very well what ACRS did. I recall how it spread out to the entire economy and caused millions to go to work. it slashed out the guts of stagflation.
5. GW Bush was only doing what Clinton and Democrats had done for years. Wage war on Iraq. Afghanistan worked well since the troops were Afghani troops rather than American troops. Franks fought a brilliant war in Afghanistan.
6. Franks also fought a brilliant war in Iraq. Had Ike been even close to as successful, he would have nailed the beaches in Normandy and wrapped up Hitler inside of 60 days. But Ike using one of our most brilliant commanders Patton, managed to drag out the war from June 1944 to the following May 7 1945 when at last Germany surrendered.

Franks took out Saddam Hussein in under 30 days. He totally obliterated Saddam's army.

 

So America doesn't have Democrat (left) supporters or Republican (right) supporters?

I thought someone who was right wing would vote for the right ing candidate in order to hopefully achieve as many right wing policies that they might agree with, and vice versa.

Or do you guys just vote for people based on just the person and you're just that person supporter? Seems far fetched to me.

 

That's because there was no connection.

 

All of which is flim flam, there has been no evidence of collusion or anything criminal. Anti-Trumpers cannot make something out of nothing any more than Starr could bring down Clinton over Whitewater or anyone would prove Obama wasn't born in the US.

 

Did you not read the post where I said he was sectarian? Problem was there was no unifying Nelson Mandela like figure who could lead Iraq into western style democracy, best of a bad bunch but you also have to ask after supporting Saddam as a dictator for so long did we have the right to impose another figurehead on them? And yes, ISIS busted the prisoners out to recruit to their ranks.

 

No, he suspended his WMD production programme due to sanctions, his uranium stockpile kept under lock and key

 

Wait, wait, wait! In one post you say he didn't have any WMDs and then in the next you say he did but they were scattered and unusable (well they certainly are now).

In addition to his uranium stockpile Saddam had nearly 5000 chemical weapons dispersed throughout Iraq, all were from his 90s stockpile, it's okay to accept that and still say you opposed the war.

 

Do show me that quote because everything I've read by them talks about them finding the remnants of his Gulf War stockpile?

 

Lied about what? They said he had WMDs and he did? The liberation overthrew a horrific dictator and now at least Iraq has a chance.

 

Yes they had no wmds accord6to the Iraq survey group. Anything they found could not be used as a wmd.

You lose

 

We destroyed that country and created isis

 

You show me one quote from the Iraq survey that says they found wmds. And they must use that term

 

The Iraqi government informed the United Nations in 2014 that insurgents affiliated with the Islamic State terror group had seized control of the Muthana State Establishment, including a chemical weapons depot northwest of Baghdad. The facility was partially destroyed and placed under the supervision of UNSCOM following the 1991 Gulf War. It housed some 2,500 sarin-filled rockets at the time of their departure in 1999. The U.N. said that the munitions were of "poor quality" and "would largely be degraded after years of storage under the conditions existing there.

It is unknown who the individual is who held possession of the weapons, and how they had come into possession. Nonetheless, they cooperated with U.S. intelligence measures and sold all known chemical WMDs to the units heading Operation Avarice. As a result, the CIA and Army intelligence acquired over 400 rockets, missiles, and other chemical weapons in varying states of operation.[117]

The unnamed Iraqi individual periodically notified the CIA's Baghdad headquarters when they had additional weapons to sell. The sales varied in size, with the largest tradeoff being for 150 separate rockets containing chemical agents. Chemical and demolitions experts then destroyed the weapons. Many of the weapons were badly degraded, and were empty or held nonlethal liquid, but some of the weapons analyzed indicated a concentration of nerve agents far higher than military intelligence had initially expected Iraq held the capabilities to formulate, with the highest "agent purity of up to 25 percent for recovered unitary sarin weapons", which was considered highly lethal and dangerous.

^ Jump up to: a b c d e f g h i j k Chivers, C.J.; Schmitt, Eric (February 15, 2015). "C.I.A. Is Said to Have Bought and Destroyed Iraqi Chemical Weapons". New York Times. Retrieved May 21, 2016.

On June 21, 2006 the United States House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence released key points from a classified report provided to them by the National Ground Intelligence Center on the recovery of chemical weapons in Iraq.

b c Katherine Shrader. New Intel Report Reignites Iraq Arms Fight,

The declassified summary stated that "Since 2003, coalition forces have recovered approximately 500 weapons munitions which contain degraded mustard or sarin nerve agent", that chemical munitions "are assessed to still exist" and that they "could be sold on the black market".
^ "National Ground Intelligence Center Report Key Points on the Recovery of Chemical Munitions in Iraq" (PDF). Retrieved 2010-10-10.

All weapons were thought to be manufactured in the 1980s and date to Iraq's war with Iran.[118] The report prompted US Senator Rick Santorum to hold a press conference in which he declared "We have found weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

^ Jim Angle. Hundreds of WMDs Found in Iraq, foxnews.com, June 22, 2006.

Nonetheless, in response to a question from committee member Curt Weldon, Col. Chui agreed that the munitions met the technical definition of weapons of mass destruction. "These are chemical weapons as defined under the Chemical Weapons Convention and yes, sir, they do constitute weapons of mass destruction."

Munitions Found in Iraq Meet WMD Criteria, Official Says". Retrieved 2016-03-12.

In October 2014, the New York Times reported that the total number of munitions discovered since 2003 had climbed to 4,990, and that U.S. servicemen had been exposed and injured during the disposal and destruction process.[125][126] US soldiers reporting exposure to mustard gas and sarin allege they were required to keep their exposure secret, sometimes declined admission to hospital and evacuation home despite the request of their commanders. "We were absolutely told not to talk about it" by a colonel, a former sergeant said.[126] "All [munitions] had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area."[126]

1. ^ "US Intelligence on Chemical Weapons". New York Times.
2. ^ Jump up to: a b c d e "US Casualties of Iraq Chemical Weapons". New York Times. Archived from the original on 2014-10-22.

Don't get me wrong, no one is claiming Saddam hadn't suspended his WMD programme due to sanctions, the intel was faulty, the Iraqi exiles told us what we wanted to hear so we would liberate them from Saddam and we believed it because we wanted to, just like the Kuwaiti nurse who testified before Congress about Iraqi soldiers stealing incubators and killing the babies who turned out to the Kuwaiti ambassador's daughter who was lying through her teeth (and Kuwait is hardly a beacon of democracy either).

 

We liberated the country and ISIS was already around in one form or other, it was the Syrian civil war which created their caliphate and that was from the Arab Spring which sadly never lived up to its' potential.

 

No, not even close. We created a power vacuum when we removed Saddam from power. Saddam didn’t tolerate any threats to his grasp on Iraq, and he didn’t tolerate fundamentalist. When we invaded Iraq, jihadist came into Iraq, and a portion of the Iraqi population turned to Al Qeda.

 

Indeed they did, they went from an utter dictatorship where it was almost impossible for a group like them to function to a freer society where they could, same in Syria, it was only due to the Arab Spring and resulting Syrian Civil War that they could emerge.

 

Jihadist types didn’t appear from nowhere once Syria went ape ****. The crazies were laying low in Iraq waiting for chaos to happen.

 

We destroyed Saddam's army and they became ISIS in prison.

 

That was apart of it. A lot of people died because of Bremer’s incompetence.

You just can’t go into countries that were created out of thin air by Europeans, remove a strong man, and expect a democracy to spring out of nowhere. You’d think that the whole regime change crowd would’ve learned that by now.

 

How can you blame bremer for what Bush and Cheney did? Everyone who knows the middle East said the invasion would be a disaster.

 

Yes and no, every society has them (look at all the foreign fighters who went to fight for ISIS) but it is almost impossible for them to operate in a dictatorship where they're as oppressed as everyone else.

 

Actually the group predates the liberation, true that they did recruit some of Saddam's ex-soldiers when they were on the ropes but it's a fallacy to say one arose from the other

 

Camp bucca prison was a finishing school for ISIS.

 

On the contrary, Afghanistan had seemed to go so well. Now of course we realise the folly of this and that Omar Sharif was right;

https://www.wnd.com/2008/06/66609/