15
   

As A Wise Man, Umm, Guy, Once Said

 
 
McGentrix
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 12:58 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:

Is Iraq better off with thousands of Americans killed there, plus countless Iraqis, and people there less secure than when the dictator ruled? I don't see how.


Probably depends on which part of Iraq you are enquiring about. The Kurds certainly think so. So do the crazies attacking now. Just because you don't see how doesn't really matter much. Bush isn't President anymore, get over it. You don't see me bitching about Clinton do you?

Let me ask you a counter question. Do you believe (And I know your answer already) that the US is better now then 5 years ago when Obama took over? (It's a trick question, we aren't and it isn't.)
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 01:47 am
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

Yellow Cake from Nigeria, Nuclear weapons, Chemical weapons .... W "explained" lots of things, only they didn't exist. W created this whole fucked up situation with his lies.

You believe in this **** so much you'll volunteer anybody else but you. You'll fight someone else to the death for your values, as long as you can stay here and misreport history. Hypocrite.

The yellowcake documents were presented to the US by foreign sources and were initially believed by US intelligence. This is not an American lie and is only a tiny piece of the motivation for attacking Iraq. The idea that Iraq had chemical weapons is true, since they were used. However, I don't believe that it is a large part of the motivation for the invasion. The real motivation, as Bush stated over and over and over again was the belief that Iraq had WMD, that Iraq had not destroyed its former nuclear and biological weapons programs as it claimed. It had certainly had the programs at one time.

The question wasn't whether Iraq had WMD programs. The question was whether they still had them and had merely taken them underground. In the early 1970s, Saddam Hussein ordered the creation of a clandestine nuclear weapons program. Iraq's WMD programs were assisted by a wide variety of firms and governments in the 1970s and 1980s. In 1988, Iraq stated that it formally decided to build nuclear weapons. Under the 1988 plan, Iraq intended to have its first weapon by the summer of 1991. German centrifuge experts from the company H&H Metallform, came to Baghdad in 1988 and sold the Iraqis old designs for centrifuges. Five other German firms supplied equipment to manufacture botulin toxin and mycotoxin for germ warfare.

Iraq had finally signed a treaty agreeing to destroy its WMD programs and to allow international inspection. However, after 12 years, they could not be made to allow inspectors free access and the UN had several times declared them in material breach of the treaty. The belief that Iraq had taken these programs underground rather than destroying them was widespread at the time and there is no reason to think that president Bush didn't believe it, although we now know that the programs, in fact, no longer existed. There is no evidence of a lie.

Had Iraq still had such programs, they might have eventually succeeded which would be unacceptable. Someone like Saddam Hussein could not be allowed to possess weapons so powerful that a single use of one of them could kill hundreds of thousands of people. Based on the knowledge available at the time, invasion was the right thing to do. And, by the way, the scenario of a ruthless, amoral dictator who denies having WMD programs despite some indication that he does will almost certainly happen again and again.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 01:51 am
@bobsal u1553115,
bobsal u1553115 wrote:

You insufferable ass.

1. Nigerian yellow cake
2. WMDs
3. Working with al Qaeda
4. Involved with Sep11

There's more lies that, cretin.

I've dispatched 1 and 2. When did president Bush use Iraq involvement in 9/11 as a motivation for invasion? Can you post a link to that?
Setanta
 
  3  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 03:49 am
@Brandon9000,
No, you have not dispatched anything. You have been peddling that BS for years. The yellow cake story was phony. The CIA asked Joseph Wilson to investigate it because of his expertise in west African affairs and his knowledge and contacts among influential people in west Africa, specifically Nigeria. He reported that the yellow cake story was phony. But the administration continued to tout the story, so Wilson went public to say that it was phony. That's when Cheney sent his hatchet man, Scooter Libby, to attack Wilson through is wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA agent. Libby outed here, has been convicted for it, and has been sued by Wilson and Plame. But you keep peddling this BS, have done for years, and probably will still peddle that BS in years to come.

Hans Blix, the head of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission stated publicly that Iraq had no wmds and no wmd programs. But the Neo-cons in the administration didn't like that ansser, so they started a campaign to smear Blix. Subsequently, we spent billions of dollars to invade Iraq, killing tens of thousands of people at least, if not actually hundreds of thousands of people, to find that Blix and Wilson, the experts, were right all along.

You've got you head slammed so far into the sand that you'll never see the truth.
djjd62
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 04:57 am
this thread had less to do with politics, and more to do with the futility of forcing change on another entity

how many women have said, "i'll change him after the wedding"

the Bush dress-up party and his inane statement was just icing on the cake
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 06:46 am
No matter when we left, the same situation would eventually have occurred, those factions apparently have been at each others throats for a long time. No matter whose in "control" the controlling faction will always run roughshod over the other factions and the other factions will resent it and eventually fight back. As far as I am aware in modern history anyway, Saddam was the only one strong enough to keep his power base strong enough to resist the other factions from fighting back, by brutal oppression. Unless we just stay there forever, which we couldn't do because of the security agreement, trouble is bound to pop up.

Apparently Iran is sending their troops, Hague is talking to Turkey, I imagine in the end, we will send air power and other logistical support.

I left the following on the other Iraq thread.

Iran sends troops into Iraq to aid fight against Isis militants

0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 06:47 am
@McGentrix,
McGentrix wrote:

edgarblythe wrote:

Is Iraq better off with thousands of Americans killed there, plus countless Iraqis, and people there less secure than when the dictator ruled? I don't see how.


Probably depends on which part of Iraq you are enquiring about. The Kurds certainly think so. So do the crazies attacking now. Just because you don't see how doesn't really matter much. Bush isn't President anymore, get over it. You don't see me bitching about Clinton do you?

Let me ask you a counter question. Do you believe (And I know your answer already) that the US is better now then 5 years ago when Obama took over? (It's a trick question, we aren't and it isn't.)

Only some parts of Iraq benefited from the war.
The nation is better off since Bush left office (this is almost a given, seeing the disasters he presided over) but obstructionist Teabagger types have kept it from being in a better recovery than would otherwise be the case.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 09:04 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

No, you have not dispatched anything. You have been peddling that BS for years. The yellow cake story was phony. The CIA asked Joseph Wilson to investigate it because of his expertise in west African affairs and his knowledge and contacts among influential people in west Africa, specifically Nigeria. He reported that the yellow cake story was phony. But the administration continued to tout the story, so Wilson went public to say that it was phony. That's when Cheney sent his hatchet man, Scooter Libby, to attack Wilson through is wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA agent. Libby outed here, has been convicted for it, and has been sued by Wilson and Plame. But you keep peddling this BS, have done for years, and probably will still peddle that BS in years to come.

Hans Blix, the head of the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission stated publicly that Iraq had no wmds and no wmd programs. But the Neo-cons in the administration didn't like that ansser, so they started a campaign to smear Blix. Subsequently, we spent billions of dollars to invade Iraq, killing tens of thousands of people at least, if not actually hundreds of thousands of people, to find that Blix and Wilson, the experts, were right all along.

You've got you head slammed so far into the sand that you'll never see the truth.

Iraq had had active WMD research programs. Iraq signed a treaty promising to destroy them and to allow UN inspectors unfettered access. After 12 years of trying to obtain cooperation, the UN was still declaring Iraq in material breach of the treaty. All Saddam Hussein would have had to do to make us go away is keep his word and allow free inspections. It is reasonable to think that his lack of cooperation indicated that he was hiding still extant programs as demonstrated by the fact that so many people did believe it. Had Saddam Hussein still possessed research programs that eventually paid off, the consequences could have been extremely, extremely bad. Someone like him could not be allowed to control weapons so powerful that a single one could annihilate a city. There is no reason to assume that Bush wasn't expressing what he really thought by stating a commonly held opinion. Hence, no evidence of a lie.
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 09:13 am
Of course the fact that Bush ran the inspectors out of Iraq has no bearing here.
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 09:20 am
Robert Reich

I'm here in Florida visiting my father, Ed Reich, who, at the young age of 100 and a half, just came up with one of the most incisive assessments I've heard of what's happened in Iraq: "George W. Bush and the crooks he hired are responsible for this. If they hadn't lied to the American people about weapons of mass destruction we wouldn't have lost nearly 5,000 American lives and god knows how many Iraqi lives, and stirred up this hornet's nest. Obama has spent his entire administration cleaning up Bush's ****, like someone with a giant pooper scooper." Dad has lived during the administrations of 17 presidents. "Bush was the worst," he says. "Reagan the second worst."
Brandon9000
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 09:21 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

No, you have not dispatched anything. You have been peddling that BS for years. The yellow cake story was phony. The CIA asked Joseph Wilson to investigate it because of his expertise in west African affairs and his knowledge and contacts among influential people in west Africa, specifically Nigeria. He reported that the yellow cake story was phony. But the administration continued to tout the story, so Wilson went public to say that it was phony. That's when Cheney sent his hatchet man, Scooter Libby, to attack Wilson through is wife, Valerie Plame, a CIA agent. Libby outed here, has been convicted for it, and has been sued by Wilson and Plame. But you keep peddling this BS, have done for years, and probably will still peddle that BS in years to come....

Also:

In a July 11, 2003 statement, CIA director George Tenet, stated that the President, Vice President and other senior administration officials were not briefed on Wilson's report (otherwise widely distributed in the intelligence community) because it "did not resolve whether Iraq was or was not seeking uranium from abroad".[27] In his 2007 memoir, Tenet writes that Wilson's report "produced no solid answers" and "was never delivered to Cheney. In fact, I have no recollection myself of hearing about Wilson's trip at the time."[28]


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_C._Wilson#Trip_to_Niger
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 09:25 am
Don't matter which of them told the lies, the world knew better and we protested by the millions before it began.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 09:27 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
Robert Reich

I'm here in Florida visiting my father, Ed Reich, who, at the young age of 100 and a half, just came up with one of the most incisive assessments I've heard of what's happened in Iraq: "George W. Bush and the crooks he hired are responsible for this. If they hadn't lied to the American people about weapons of mass destruction we wouldn't have lost nearly 5,000 American lives and god knows how many Iraqi lives, and stirred up this hornet's nest. Obama has spent his entire administration cleaning up Bush's ****, like someone with a giant pooper scooper." Dad has lived during the administrations of 17 presidents. "Bush was the worst," he says. "Reagan the second worst."

Thanks for the testimonial, but testimonial is irrelevant to debate. I have yet to hear what the lie was. The idea that Iraq had merely hidden its former longstanding WMD programs was common at the time, reinforced by Iraq's lack of compliance with inspectors, and had they actually developed such weapons, the world might well have paid a hideous price. There is no reason whatever to believe that president Bush wasn't expressing his true opinion when he said that Iraq likely still had WMD programs. Was everyone lying who thought so? You love to say he lied, but cannot show that it's true, and I doubt that it is true. What are you going to do the next time - and there will be next times - a manifestly evil dictator seems to be developing nuclear and/or biological weapons, but says that he isn't. Will you wait until he shows that he has them by killing hundreds of thousands or millions of people?
0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  0  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 09:45 am
I am not a military expert, but even I knew that we had complete control over the sky there, after the first war. Our planes and satellites would have detected any serious moves by Iraq in plenty of time to bomb them. Everything Bush and his men said were lies, not just in part, but a whole fabric.
Brandon9000
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 09:50 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
I am not a military expert, but even I knew that we had complete control over the sky there, after the first war. Our planes and satellites would have detected any serious moves by Iraq in plenty of time to bomb them. Everything Bush and his men said were lies, not just in part, but a whole fabric.

Okay, what was one example of a lie? If you want to argue that Bush lied, you really have to answer that. The likelihood of WMD could easily have been his true opinion because it was a view held by many. The yellowcake documents (a) were a minor part of the argument, and (b) couldn't be instantly evaluated as forged by the administration.

You cannot make any real case that these involve lies. So, give me an example of something you can provide evidence was a lie. Unless, of course, you're just going to keep saying it because you like to.
revelette2
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 09:51 am
There is simply too much going on to rehash what the world has already figured out.

Young Iraqis volunteer to fight surging militants
Quote:

Hundreds of young Iraqi men gripped by religious and nationalistic fervor streamed into volunteer centers Saturday across Baghdad, answering a call by the country's top Shiite cleric to join the fight against Sunni militants advancing in the north.


Dozens climbed into the back of army trucks, chanting Shiite slogans and hoisting assault rifles, pledging to join the nation's beleaguered security forces to battle the Sunni group known as the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, which has launched a lightning advance across the country.

"By God's will, we will be victorious." said one volunteer, Ali Saleh Aziz. "We will not be stopped by the ISIL or any other terrorists."

The massive response to the call by the Iranian-born Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, issued via his representative Friday, comes as sectarian tensions are threatening to push the country back toward civil war in the worst crisis since U.S. forces withdrew at the end of 2011.

Fighters from the al-Qaida splinter group, drawing support from former Saddam Hussein-era figures and other disaffected Sunnis, have made dramatic gains in the Sunni heartland north of Baghdad after overrunning Iraq's second-largest city of Mosul on Tuesday. Soldiers and policemen have melted away in the face of the lightning advance, and thousands have fled to the self-rule Kurdish region in northern Iraq.

On Saturday, insurgents seized the small town of Adeim in Diyala province after Iraqi security forces pulled out, said the head of the municipal council, Mohammed Dhifan. Adeim is about 100 kilometers (60 miles) north of Baghdad. There was no official confirmation of the loss of the town.

Jawad al-Bolani, a lawmaker and former Cabinet minister close to Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, said a military offensive was underway Saturday to drive the insurgents from Tikrit, Saddam's hometown north of Baghdad, although fighting in the area could not be confirmed.

AP Television News footage showed Kurdish fighters, known as peshmerga, driving out militants who had taken over an army outpost some 24 kilometers (15 miles) west of the oil city of Kirkuk. The position had earlier been abandoned by Iraqi army troops. Long coveted by the Kurds who have a self-rule region in northern Iraq, Kirkuk fell under the control of the peshmerga this week after Iraqi army forces left.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said Saturday his Shiite nation is ready to help Iraq if asked, adding that it has "no option but to confront terrorism." Addressing a news conference, he suggested the Sunni militants in northern Iraq are linked to Iraqi politicians who lost in parliamentary elections held in April.

"We will study if there is a demand for help from Iraq. Until today, no specific request for help has been demanded. But we are ready to help within international law," he said. "Entry of our forces (into Iraq) to carry out operations has not been raised so far. It's unlikely that such conditions will emerge."

Iran has built close political and economic ties with Iraq since the 2003 U.S.-led invasion toppled Saddam's Sunni-led regime and many influential Iraqi Shiites, including al-Maliki, have spent years in exile in the Islamic Republic.

The fast-moving rebellion has emerged as the biggest threat to Iraq's stability since even before the Americans left.

Long-simmering Sunni-Shiite tensions boiled over after the U.S.-led invasion ousted Saddam in 2003, leading to vicious fighting between the two Muslim sects. But the bloodshed ebbed in 2008 after a so-called U.S. surge, a revolt by moderate Sunnis against al-Qaida in Iraq and a Shiite militia cease-fire.

The latest bout of fighting, stoked by the civil war in neighboring Syria, has pushed the nation even closer to a precipice that could partition it into Sunni, Shiite and Kurdish zones.

Shiite cleric and political leader Ammar al-Hakim was shown on television networks donning a camouflaged military fatigue as he spoke to volunteers from his party, although he still wore his clerical black turban that designates him as a direct descendant of the Prophet Muhammad.

State-run television also aired a constant flow of nationalist songs, clips of soldiers marching or singing, flying aircraft, brief interviews with troops vowing to crush the militants and archival clips of the nation's top Shiite clerics.

Extensive clips of al-Maliki's visit on Friday to the city of Samarra, home to a much revered Shiite shrine that was bombed in 2006, also were broadcast.

The footage seemed clearly aimed at rehabilitating his reputation in the eyes of Shiites, with a dour-faced al-Maliki seen praying at the Shiite shrine — an apparent reminder of his commitment to his faith and the protection of its followers. He also declared that Samarra would be the assembly point for the march farther north to drive out the militants, another decision with a religious slant to win over Shiites.

In an address to military commanders in Samarra, he warned that army deserters could face the death penalty if they don't report back to their units. But he insisted the crisis had a silver lining.

"This is our chance to clean and purge the army from these elements that only want to make gains from being in the army and the police," he said. "They thought that this is the beginning of the end but, in fact, we say that this is the beginning of their end and defeat."

Also Saturday, the Iraqi government's counterterrorism department said the son of Saddam's vice president, Izzat Ibrahim al-Douri, was killed in an air raid by the Iraqi air force in Tikrit. It said Ahmed al-Douri was killed with some 50 other Saddam loyalists and ISIL fighters on Friday. The report could not be immediately verified.


Even if it is mixed in with their religious culture, it's good that Iraqis are standing up for themselves, isn't it? Much better than the US stepping in, I hope we can avoid it.

0 Replies
 
edgarblythe
 
  0  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 10:09 am
@Brandon9000,
I gave you all the lies. It is obvious you don't want to consider it that way. I have read all your arguments on other threads for years. If you expect to do a thousand argumentive posts on it here, it will have to be with somebody else. Not me. The whole world, except some holdouts like you know the world got bamboozled by Bush and now we have a worsening mess as a result.
Brandon9000
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 11:12 am
@edgarblythe,
edgarblythe wrote:
I gave you all the lies. It is obvious you don't want to consider it that way. I have read all your arguments on other threads for years. If you expect to do a thousand argumentive posts on it here, it will have to be with somebody else. Not me. The whole world, except some holdouts like you know the world got bamboozled by Bush and now we have a worsening mess as a result.

No, the whole world doesn't know that, just the people you hang out with or choose to listen to. "Everyone knows" is not a valid argument. You haven't shown that Bush didn't believe what many believed - that Iraq had merely taken its nuclear and biological weapons development underground. You just like to claim that he lied, but have not shown that it's true. Saying it over and over doesn't count as evidence. How's this? You're lying about everything and I don't require any evidence to run around claiming it. Edgarblythe lied. See how easy that is if you don't need evidence?

What are you going to do when the next horrible dictator seems to be developing nuclear or biological weapons and claims that he isn't, because I assure you, it will keep happening.
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 11:13 am
@Brandon9000,
Brandon9000 wrote:
Iraq had had active WMD research programs.


Bullshit--you have no source for that claim.

Quote:
Iraq signed a treaty promising to destroy them and to allow UN inspectors unfettered access. After 12 years of trying to obtain cooperation, the UN was still declaring Iraq in material breach of the treaty. All Saddam Hussein would have had to do to make us go away is keep his word and allow free inspections.


As you consider Wikipedia a reliable source . . .

Quote:
Along with IAEA, UNMOVIC led inspections of alleged chemical and biological facilities in Iraq until shortly before the U.S. invasion of Iraq in March 2003. According to its Executive Chairman, Mr Blix

"in the buildup to the war, Saddam Hussein and the Iraqis were cooperating with UN inspections, and in February 2003 had provided UNMOVIC with the names of hundreds of scientists to interview, individuals Saddam claimed had been involved in the destruction of banned weapons. Had the inspections been allowed to continue, there would likely have been a very different situation in Iraq."

UNMOVIC never found any operative weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and although its inspectors were withdrawn in March 2003, continued to operate with respect to those parts of its mandate it could implement outside of Iraq and maintained a degree of preparedness to resume work in Iraq. It maintained a roster of more than 300 experts ready to serve and continued to conduct training.


Source

You have no basis for your claims. I've not said that Bush lied. That boy couldn't be trusted to do the weekly shopping on his own. But his administration knew better, and they fudged the data. In particular, Powell's claims before the UN Security Council were knowing lies.
Brandon9000
 
  2  
Reply Sat 14 Jun, 2014 11:21 am
@Setanta,
Setanta wrote:

Brandon9000 wrote:
Iraq had had active WMD research programs.


Bullshit--you have no source for that claim...


I'll quote myself:

Brandon9000 wrote:
In the early 1970s, Saddam Hussein ordered the creation of a clandestine nuclear weapons program. Iraq's WMD programs were assisted by a wide variety of firms and governments in the 1970s and 1980s. In 1988, Iraq stated that it formally decided to build nuclear weapons. Under the 1988 plan, Iraq intended to have its first weapon by the summer of 1991. German centrifuge experts from the company H&H Metallform, came to Baghdad in 1988 and sold the Iraqis old designs for centrifuges. Five other German firms supplied equipment to manufacture botulin toxin and mycotoxin for germ warfare.


You question these facts? This is invalid because I didn't attribute it? Okay. Here is one attribution:

"Iraq was failing with other enrichment technologies when German centrifuge specialists Bruno Stemmler and Walter Busse, recruited by a German company, H&H; Metallform, came to Baghdad in 1988 and sold the Iraqis old designs for centrifuges."

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2002/oct/15/20021015-092534-8333r/

Do you want me to demand that you post attribution links for every fact you give?


0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
GAFFNEY: Whose side is Obama on? - Discussion by gungasnake
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.06 seconds on 08/03/2020 at 09:06:08