Bush's Impeachable Offences

[ACPlayer]

Ask GWB how to prove a negative.

He asked the question - prove to us that you DONT have WMD or we invade.

Wasn't that asking Saddam to prove a negative.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
Ask GWB how to prove a negative.

He asked the question - prove to us that you DONT have WMD or we invade.

Wasn't that asking Saddam to prove a negative.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, we asked Saddam to prove he had complied with UN resolutions regarding his WMDs. A subtle, but important difference.

[ACPlayer]

A subtle, but important difference.. only in the eyes of the certifi(able)ed zealot.

[vulturesrow]

[ QUOTE ]
A subtle, but important difference.. only in the eyes of the certifi(able)ed zealot.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not true. There are certain conditions that had to be met under the resolution(s). The two challenges arent comparable.

[ACPlayer]

What the case boiled down to is that Saddam had to show that he did not have any WMD or any programs left. He was tasked with producing documentation to that effect. He was ready to let the inspectors inspect away, he produced all the doucments he could and was asked to prove he did not have any more documentation.

It is certainly the case that he could not offer any evidence that would convince an administration that had already decided to go to war and kept looking for excuses.

He was asked to prove a negative.

Do you really want this thread to become about the Iraq war again?

[jack spade23]

[ QUOTE ]
Unlike republicans who have never worked an honest day in their lives, I don't have the time to spend in this forum advancing your education.

[/ QUOTE ]

yea, most republicans dont have honest jobs. they all get rich by tax evasion and cheating others......you're a narrow minded person and you make people even slightly to the left look stupid by associating yourslef with them. Please stop trolling.

[kurto]

Yeah. This is unnecessary. This is like a left wing jax.