1
   

Report slams CIA for Iraq intelligence failures

 
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jul, 2004 01:04 pm
The Bush Administration itself is no longer making claims that this was a primary reason to go to war. It was the primary reason to convince the U.S. citizenry, the legislative body and the world that the invasion was warranted. Only Cheney has hung onto the Iraq/al-Queda connection saying he never did say it was confirmed until he was proved a liar all over the cable and network news channels that he did, in fact, state it was absolutely confirmed in a previous interview. Can anyone trust these people? Anyone who wants at all cost to continually be fooled by them.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jul, 2004 01:19 pm
the reincarnation of suzy wrote:
Oh, I apologize if you took that as a personal attack. Maybe it was... Sorry.
Your thread is long and I had to go to work.
I can take you on point by point, but I'll bet somebody has already done so on previous threads anyway. Time and again. The points you make are not new to the forum and have been addressed before, no doubt. And I hate to repeat myself or anyone else. Sometimes I simply choose not to waste my time doing so. It's not like I'm going to change your mind.
However, I have a problem with your last point.
"Is believed not to have completed its development of nuclear weapons"
You think we should go to war with any nation that is trying to develop nuclear weapons? I mean, we have them. Why shouldn't other nations be allowed to protect themselves? I would prefer that they don't have them either, but really, who are we to say they can't? I think that it's attitudes like this that make other nations "hate" us. If we want to be top dog, we need to give better incentives than that! All that is, is an ultimatum. A threat.

I understand what you're saying about your job. Debating on these forums is not necessarily compatible with my job.

I agree that what I am saying is not new. Nor is most of what my opponents are saying new. But what I am saying seems to me to be the correct answer to what they are saying. If we are going to debate at all, then this is how it works.

To answer your question, no I do not think that we should go to war with any nation that is trying to develop nuclear weapons. I have never, ever said such a thing. What I have consistently said is that people on a level with Hitler and Stalin cannot be allowed to possess weapons so powerful that one single use of one can kill tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands, or even millions of people.

Here is why I included the criterion that a nation we invade should not yet possess nuclear weapons. Let's take North Korea as an example, and let's assume that North Korea is telling the truth when it claims to have nukes. If we invaded, they could kill a million people - either our soldiers, or the South Koreans - within the first hour or so of the war. Therefore, invasion is not a practical option. Since we foolishly allowed them to develop nuclear weapons, we now have no choice but to negotiate with them, no matter how unreasonable, bizarre, or inflexible their demands. It is too late to invade them.
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jul, 2004 01:23 pm
Lightwizard wrote:
The Bush Administration itself is no longer making claims that this was a primary reason to go to war. It was the primary reason to convince the U.S. citizenry, the legislative body and the world that the invasion was warranted. Only Cheney has hung onto the Iraq/al-Queda connection saying he never did say it was confirmed until he was proved a liar all over the cable and network news channels that he did, in fact, state it was absolutely confirmed in a previous interview. Can anyone trust these people? Anyone who wants at all cost to continually be fooled by them.

I am saying that WMD was the correct reason for invading Iraq. Bush and Cheney are free to say what they want.
0 Replies
 
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jul, 2004 01:51 pm
Sounds like you should start your own party. Very Happy Drunk
0 Replies
 
Brandon9000
 
  1  
Reply Tue 13 Jul, 2004 01:52 pm
Lightwizard wrote:
Sounds like you should start your own party. Very Happy Drunk

Since I am usually in agreement with Republican party positions, I prefer to support them. I do reserve the right to think for myself, though.
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
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/07/2024 at 03:58:23