Posted by Here we go on November 27, 2005 at 23:09:08 (PST):
In Reply to: Avoiding the issue posted by Speaking Just For Me on November 27, 2005 at 22:38:55 (PST):
: : : : : : : : I guess since Iran is claiming Bush should be tried for the "war crimes" of using nuclear and biological weapons against Iraq, we're going have all the democrats and liberals jumping on that bandwagon!
: : : : : : : : It would be absolutely NO surprise to me.
: : : : : : : : Hey China...When you finally decide to roll over our country, make sure the democrats are running things, should be a cakewalk then! Probably do it without firing a shot!
: : : : : : : : ah-so...tank ooo verdy mach.
: : : : : : : : Also...proposed law..."Doctors must provide interpeters for those who cannot speak English!!!!" What a fuckin' age we live in!!!!
: : : : : : : You are correct. What an age we live in when the American people were so easily duped into believing that we had some type of cause of to invade Iraq?
: : : : : : : What an age we live in when we still have Americans believing that Saddam was somehow linked to 09/11. Of course, our vice-president did try to link the two over and over, again.
: : : : : : : The Bush administration went into Iraq on the cheap and put our troops at risk by not sending enough troops over there to begin with. The vice-president lied when he told the public we would be greeted as freedom fighters, instead the complete opposite occurred.
: : : : : : : I do not know if Bush ordered chemical or biological weapons to be used, but wouldn't it look pretty bad if we did? This was one of the reasons Bush said we went to war (he had many excuses over a couple of months) with Iraq, he said Saddam gassed the kurds.
: : : : : : : No, the Dems would not make that much of a difference. It is third-party time.
: : : : : : : I just think it is humorous when people say, "Oh my, those liberals and Dems are doing this and that."
: : : : : : : What, if anything, has Dubbya accomplished to make your life better? Wake up, read the newspaper, read some books, turn off the talk-
: : : : : : radio.
: : : : : : The only radio I listen to is rock...dude. So you actually think that we used nukes and bio over there? What a moron. Regardless of what reason they used, the plain and simple truth is that they were given terms to abide by after the last invasion. They didn't abide by them. We gave them 16 chances. (during which time they could well have easily hidden everything). These terms were laid down in order to prevent them from creating weapons that could be used by terrorists. Then, only AFTER terrorists killed 4,000 of our citizens on our own soil did we finally go in. So what if they weren't related. we were attacked by terrorists, these terms were laid down to protect us from terrorists. It was time for us to take a stand, and Iraq was defying us at the time. I suppose you think that, after all those people were killed, we should have continued to allow a country we already considered a threat to defy us.
: : : : : : And quit sayin Dubbya...you sound like an idiot.
: : : : :
: : : : : What was more important in your opinion, going after the terrorists that caused the destruction on 09/11 or brewing up some faulty intelligence to be used as a reason to invade Iraq?
: : : : : Once again, you believe the propoganda by Dubbya and the neocons that these weapons, if they existed, could just be moved around. I just a read a quote from Big Dick Cheney from the Fall of 2002 in which he stated in an interview that there was "no doubt" that Saddam had initiated a nuclear program in Iraq and there was evidence of that. That is a bold statement when saying there is evidence. If there was physical evidence of this be it from intelligence on the ground or in the sky, that program could not be moved and taken to Syria or hidden in the Bat Cave like Dubbya wants the people to believe.
: : : : : Nice try, dude, but your defense of Dubbya and his cronies is losing credibility daily. You may want to try a different approach, because the "liberal" and "Democrat" path is not getting you anywhere. This administration cannot blame anybody from now on, because the American people distrust them. They need to come up with answers and resolutions. The blame game is stale. The American people want to know what the facts are. The "You're unpatriotic if you disagree with the president" theme is over. I will agree with you that the Dems might not have the answers, either, but right now, Dubbya has to answer to the American people bewcause he is in the position of leader, and so far, he has failed in his duties.
: : : : Dubbya...neocons...you just don't run out of them do you. Maybe you've forgotten or just choose not to remember, but a while back, during the campaigns, the dems and liberals (the reason I lump them together is because they both care about absolutely nothing other than making the current administration look bad rather than trrying to possibly do something to make themselves look good) both wanted us all to believe that the insurgents not only moved 500,000 tons of explosives from bunkers and hid them somewhere using pickup trucks, but that they also accomplished this while our troops were occupying the country. Yet you don't think that they could have hidden anything during the 2 1/2 years we were pussyfootin around waiting for them to "allow" the inspectors into the country. Please, at least, admit that this IS POSSIBLE!
: : : : Even if you don't think it's LIKELY, you know that it COULD have happened.
: : : : You certainly cannot deny that they were not "allowing" the inspections to take place.
: : : :
: : :
: : : Yes, I agree with you that Saddam was prolonging the investigations. No doubt. I think the reason he did this was to save face as a leader. If he just rolled over and let the inspectors come in, then he would no be appeasing the other countries in the Middle East.
: : : If the Americans had known the location of any weapons arsenal or WMDs, then my answer would be positively no. It would not have been possible to move the WMDs or a weapons arsenal in regards to something extensive. We are too well-equipped with surveillance and reconnaissance for that to have happened, especially with the attention Iraq was getting over the last decade. Do you really think we rely solely on inspectors to know if a country has the capabilities of certain biological or nuclear weapons? Read up on some information that can be found in Jane's Manuals. There is plenty of information out there. This type of reconnaissance is not even that new. It has been around for over two decades. So, no, I do not think they dismantled their weapons manufacturing system without the U.S. knowing about it. Even a pick-up truck would be considered "traffic" around a suspected weapons depot. This is not some type of action movie. Most of the things we see in those action movies are over the top, but then on the other hand, there are things that do not take into account our full capabilities.
: : : As for as your could've, should've, possibly happened....anything could happen, but the odds of it are very, very unlikely. It would take huge technological breakdown to occur, but even if it did, then that means that Iraq has intelligence far better than ours, because they would have had to move the weapons at just the right time, knowing that we lost our capability to track those weapons. It is just not plausible. We would still have data, photographs, etc. from before showing the circumstances before the intelligence was lost. We have not seen anything. when Colin Powell went in front of the UN, he had absolutely, positively nothing. It was later shown that he was quoting from a college research paper, and the photo-ops were proven to be nothing more than a emergency vehicle which was said to be there in case something disasterous occurred. We had the world stage, and we could not prove anything. I was skeptical at first, but after Powell went in front of the UN, it sealed it for me. There was nothing and Dubbya and his neocon cronies were pulling the wool over the eyes of the American public. Since that day, we have been receving distorted information on a weekly basis.
: : : As for you assertions about the Dems, I can agree with you on that, but what happened when Slick Willie was in office. The neocons did not have a national security breach or a dereliction of duty to call him on, instead, they practically disrupted our democratic process over a marital affair. Now, if you believe that a sexual affair takes precedence over initiating a war, racking up uncomprehensible debts, and cutting services to all Americans, then I guess you will never see what is going on. I will even give you this much. It would have been okay for me to have clinton removed from office, but the same or even more scruitny should be applied to Dubbya, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, etc. The damage they have caused will be felt for ages from every American.
: : If our technology and survielance are so great, that they couldn't have moved anything, why didn't the same technology and survielance see them moving all the explosives? Maybe you think that they weren't there either, even though they had footage of them being there a few days earlier.
: : What do you mean we "haven't seen anything"? What do you think all the senators were looking at that made them VOTE to go in? Saddam lost "face" when we went in the first time. How much "face" do you think he has with his people now? How much "face" did he have with his people when he was kurdering them by the thousands? How much "face" did he have when we pulled him up out of his spider hole looking like he hadn't eaten in a month?
: I agree with your comment about the "VOTE", but this has changed even with the GOP hawks. Now, the excuse is that we were given faulty intelligence, correct? Or, are you telling all of us that all of those who voted "yes" on both sides of the aisle are saying that they still believe had WMDs? That is the question.
: Sure, both sides voted for the resolution, but are you telling us that no GOP member shave backed away from the evidence that was presented to them? Senator John Warner, a GOP hawk, was on Russert's show today, and he was getting grilled about this same question, and he never came out and stated that these WMDs were there? He kept going back to faulty intelligence. So what is it? Are you saying they were there and moved? (Almost impossible to imagine) Or, are you saying that the intelligence was supposedly flawed and the Congress voted on misinformation?
: I do not know all the details about the explosives, but I will read up on it. It all depends what they were......low explosives, high explosives, blasting agents, etc.??? I am sure we are not going to be concerned with blasting agents. Now, this is where the Dubbya bandwagon trickery comes in, just like the metal tubes they found, come into play.
: The Vice-President came out out on national television and said that Saddam had established manufacturing nuclear weapons in the Fall 2002. The interview was shown on Russert's show today. Where is this evidence that made this a certainty? He provided nothing.
: You missed the whole point about saving "face." He was saving face to maitain his leadership. He knew what Dubbya's plan was based on the record of his cronies around him, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. What did you expect him to do? He could have let them search far and wide, and the neocons would not have been satisfied, so they needed to manufacture some intelligence. There was nothing there.
I am saying we never should have accepted "no" for an answer for going in to inspect. I am saying if he didn't have anything they were not supposed to, they could have allowed the inspections and that would have been the end of it. So based on the fact that he didn't allow the inspections, yes, I think they had the WMD's or something that they weren't supposed to have.
Everyone had the same intel to go over BEFORE voting and they voted to go in.
How come you never talk about any Dem hawks...I guess you don't think there are any.
You always tell everyone else to try and get their info from other places and not to fall prey to the opinions of talk shows..How many times have you brought up this "fall of 2002" info? Did you just remeber it? Or did somebody maybe bring it up on their "TALK SHOW" oh that's right, you already said it was on Russert's show...that's unbiased.
You don't remember the big controvesy over the bunkers full of explosives? That's funny. That's where they say all these roadside bombs are supposed to be comming from. It was the Dems who made such a big deal out of them coming up missing. What they say happened to those explosives is the same thing they say couldn't have happened to the WMD's. The explosives would have been MUCH harder to move because we were occupying the country. Yet it is contended that the DID move and hide the explosives and COULDN'T HAVE moved the WMD's.