Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
While I don't agree with why we went to Iraq in the first place, you make it seem that the US military is the sole reason for the bombings that take place. Saddam slaughtered hundreds of thousand of Iraqi's, and the civilians of Iraq lived in fear of him, his sons, and the Baa'thists.
They are now removed and the roadside bombs that are killing people have slowed down considerably and are being conducted by those that supported Saddam to begin with. Now, we do need to leave Iraq and turn it over to their security and soon. However, we also need to do it when they are capable of doing so.
You claim that someone gets their news from Fox. Do you get your news from CNN? The New York Times?
Cnn ( commi news network ) won't never cover what you posted so these loopy people wont ever know the real facts.
But...... but...... but... we didnt go to war because of that..... but... but...
While I don't agree with why we went to Iraq in the first place, you make it seem that the US military is the sole reason for the bombings that take place. Saddam slaughtered hundreds of thousand of Iraqi's, and the civilians of Iraq lived in fear of him, his sons, and the Baa'thists. They are now removed and the roadside bombs that are killing people have slowed down considerably and are being conducted by those that supported Saddam to begin with. Now, we do need to leave Iraq and turn it over to their security and soon. However, we also need to do it when they are capable of doing so.
You claim that someone gets their news from Fox. Do you get your news from CNN? The New York Times?
NPR, actually. So nice try assuming AGAIN, floridabound, what I do, who I am, and what I believe in. You must be proud of yourself for your "wisdom".
Besides we have found WMD's but not the kind any of the bush haters will ever accept so who cares what they think.
Nor apparently the kind the President HIMSELF accepts.
And yet again, the President himself says: "main reason we went into Iraq at the time was we thought he had weapons of mass destruction. It turns out he didn't"
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Floridabound09
We are much safer today then we were 6 years ago and it is mainly due to the Iraq War and us shutting down our enemies.
IF we are safer today, and that's pure speculation, 16 US intelligence agencies concluded we weren't made safer by the Iraq invasion. Are you now claiming that you have more knowledge of the situation than 16 US agencies or just blowing smoke?
Wow! This is sort of like a visit to Dinosaur Adventure Land with all those creationist exhibits about historical things that never happened. The suspension of all critical faculties is required upon entry. I'm amazed that there are still people recycling long ago discredited "discoveries" as if there had ever been any significance to them at all. Isn't this a little like re-releasing Milli Vanilli's Greatest Hits?
Hundreds of tons of radioactive material at an underground storage center south of Baghdad? What a shock. That's Al-Tuwaitha, and the materials there had been under IAEA seal since right after the Gulf War. Big discovery...something the UN had been sitting on for about a dozen years. The materials were not removed because they would have been of no use in any sort of program at all. But what if all of those materials had been enriched? Yeah, in theory, but that would have required a sprawling billion-dollar complex to accomplish. Any signs of one of those around? No? Gee, that sort of puts things in a little different light, doesn't it.
At some point, it all causes one to start wondering whether in reality there is any practical limit beyond which the effects of pie-eyed self-delusion cannot go...
Wow! This is sort of like a visit to Dinosaur Adventure Land with all those creationist exhibits about historical things that never happened. The suspension of all critical faculties is required upon entry. I'm amazed that there are still people recycling long ago discredited "discoveries" as if there had ever been any significance to them at all. Isn't this a little like re-releasing Milli Vanilli's Greatest Hits?
Hundreds of tons of radioactive material at an underground storage center south of Baghdad? What a shock. That's Al-Tuwaitha, and the materials there had been under IAEA seal since right after the Gulf War. Big discovery...something the UN had been sitting on for about a dozen years. The materials were not removed because they would have been of no use in any sort of program at all. But what if all of those materials had been enriched? Yeah, in theory, but that would have required a sprawling billion-dollar complex to accomplish. Any signs of one of those around? No? Gee, that sort of puts things in a little different light, doesn't it.
At some point, it all causes one to start wondering whether in reality there is any practical limit beyond which the effects of pie-eyed self-delusion cannot go...
I agree.
It has become ABUNDENTLY clear that there were in fact no stockpiles of WMDs of any kind. There were a few bits and pieces left over that were lost - but that's pretty much it. It IS true that Saddam probably would have liked to redevelop them at some point - but even if he had started to do so it would have taken quite a while to rebuild the infrastructure (weapons plants etc) and regenerate his stockpiles.
As I said earlier, I am NOT one of the "Bush Lied" folks. I believe he honestly thought they were there - as did Clinton and a whole host of leaders around the world (heck, I believed they were there myself) - but the truth is WE WERE ALL WRONG. We now know that Saddam hoodwinked everyone (including his own generals). Why? Well, we're not really sure - maybe once he'd complied with the demand to get rid of his WMD's he had second thoughts and thought knuckling under to the UN would undermine his prestige among his neighboring counties so he pretended he still had WMD's so he could appear to be standing up to US pressure - or maybe his WMD program was such a mess to begin with that he never had good records of what he actually had produced in the first place so there was no way to reconcile what he'd destroyed with what the UN said he had, and rather than admit publically just how messed up and ineffectual his programs were he lied about what he'd had and pretended he still had more. People do all sorts of wierd things to save face.
The fact is, we really don't know for sure why he continued to drop hints that he still had WMD's but in any event Saddam had CLEARLY gotten rid of what he'd had years ago and at the time of the US liberation/invasion (take your pick) Iraq was in no shape to restart anything.
Obviously there are those people out there that continue to deny the obvious - EVEN AFTER THE PRESIDENT HIMSELF SAYS THERE WERE NO WMD's. Why this is I don't know, but it seems to me it's likely they fall into 3 camps:
1) Hyper-political zealots who simply don't care about the truth but are merely seeking to limit the political damage to the Republican Party from the fallout from the Iraq War. These folks will deny, deny, deny and point to ANY little bit of evidence for WMDs no matter how vague or discredited that evidence may be. They will NEVER admit they were wrong - NEVER, under ANY circumstances, even when they KNOW what they are saying is pure BS. This group includes some of the more extreme right-wing talk show hosts as well as authors who pen books that they KNOW are full of inaccurate information but simply don't care because they are of the opinion that the "ends justify the means" - and those ends are for the Republican Party to remain in power.
2) Those authors who's ONLY concern is making money. They know that there are always folks out there who will buy a book backing a particular position and so they write books telling those folks what those folks want to hear (whether it's true or not is entirely irrelevant).
3) Those ordinary folks who listen to those who fall into categories #1 & #2 and truly believe them. They are the reason groups 1 and 2 exist. These folks believe that those they follow would never lie to them (they are wrong).
The claims that the WMDs were found, were smuggled into Syria, were taken away by aliens from space, or whatever are bogus pure and simple. When Presdent Bush - who's reputation suffered enormously because WMD's were NOT found - admits himself that the WMD's didn't exist then the fact is, THEY DIDN'T EXIST. He has NO reason to lie and say they weren't found and EVERY reason to lie and say they were found -and he says they were NOT found.
I'm no fan of Bush (he's done enormous damage to both the Republican party and the country as a whole), but I see NO reason to disbeleive him on this issue.
There were NO WMD's - despite what some diehards here may say.
It has become ABUNDENTLY clear that there were in fact no stockpiles of WMDs of any kind. There were a few bits and pieces left over that were lost - but that's pretty much it. It IS true that Saddam probably would have liked to redevelop them at some point - but even if he had started to do so it would have taken quite a while to rebuild the infrastructure (weapons plants etc) and regenerate his stockpiles.
I'd concur in much of what you say. But I would be one of the BUSH LIED folks on account of the fact that, in addition to his deliberate use of words with an intent to deceive, he routinely promoted information that he had every reason to believe was false and suppressed information that he had every reason to believe was true.
No one can have honestly believed that Iraq had WMD. One could honestly have believed that all of the WMD that Iraq was known to have had a decade or more before had not been materially accounted for, but such a belief would have had to be in full knowledge of that being the expectation, as per the 1995 debriefings of Hussein Kamel (former head of WMD programs in Iraq) indicating that Iraq had hastily destroyed large portions of its stockpiles in the aftermath of the Gulf War so as not to be found holding them by the coming UNSCOM inspection regime. Of course, one could not have been 100% certain that Kamel was telling the truth. Resolving those doubts was the task of Hans Blix. But Bush and the right-wingers did everything they could to delay and discredit that operation, ultimately using excuses of weather to send an army that was not yet fully armed and prepared into battle before UNMOVIC could complete its task of demonstrating to the world that there was absolutely no justification for the neocon's pet little war at all...
LordBalfor - there's a group #4 - who know that there were WMDs and that they have not been accounted for, who acknowledge that President Bush says they (stockpiles) weren't there but have also seen how wrong the Government can be, who use reports of leftover WMDs to refute the claim that 'no' WMDs were found, and who think that WMD was the most convenient issue to publicize out of all the reasons to go to war as listed in the Congressional authorization.
If you say that no WMD stockpiles were found (as Bush meant) - I agree.
I think the War was a good idea at the time, has served to concentrate the terrorists so we could kill them, and will result in a powerful ally to counter Iran.
I'd concur in much of what you say. But I would be one of the BUSH LIED folks on account of the fact that, in addition to his deliberate use of words with an intent to deceive, he routinely promoted information that he had every reason to believe was false and suppressed information that he had every reason to believe was true.
No one can have honestly believed that Iraq had WMD. One could honestly have believed that all of the WMD that Iraq was known to have had a decade or more before had not been materially accounted for, but such a belief would have had to be in full knowledge of that being the expectation, as per the 1995 debriefings of Hussein Kamel (former head of WMD programs in Iraq) indicating that Iraq had hastily destroyed large portions of its stockpiles in the aftermath of the Gulf War so as not to be found holding them by the coming UNSCOM inspection regime. Of course, one could not have been 100% certain that Kamel was telling the truth. Resolving those doubts was the task of Hans Blix. But Bush and the right-wingers did everything they could to delay and discredit that operation, ultimately using excuses of weather to send an army that was not yet fully armed and prepared into battle before UNMOVIC could complete its task of demonstrating to the world that there was absolutely no justification for the neocon's pet little war at all...
Yeah, I understand your position.
I'm of the opinion though that when faced with conflicting information, most people will generally tend to believe that information which supports their pre-concieved ideas and disgard that which undermines it - providing of course that the information is not overwhelmingly one-sided. Since former President Clinton, former PM Tony Blair, former Secretary of State Colin Powell have ALL said that they believed the WMD's were there, I think's it was pretty normal for President Bush to believe the information indicating the presence of WMD's and discounting the information indicating their absence. It was in the final analysis a judgement call and Bush's judgement was found to be lacking.
I don't really blame him for that. I DO however blame him for the lousy conduct of the war and many other things.
My opinion going into the war was "OK, I'll buy the fact that the WMD's are there - BUT they had BETTER be there or else there will be hell to pay."
As it turned out the WMD's were not there, and now Bush and the Republicans in general are paying the price. They made a down payment on that price in November of 2006 and the full bill will come due in November of this year. That price will be high - and will likely result in Democratic control of both houses of Congress and the White House.
And that's the way it should be. When you are in charge you should get the credit for what goes well and the blame for what goes wrong - and the fact is the Republican were in charge and as such they set the agenda (plenty of Democrats went along with them - but it was still the Republican's agenda).
LordBalfor - there's a group #4 - who know that there were WMDs and that they have not been accounted for, who acknowledge that President Bush says they (stockpiles) weren't there but have also seen how wrong the Government can be, who use reports of leftover WMDs to refute the claim that 'no' WMDs were found, and who think that WMD was the most convenient issue to publicize out of all the reasons to go to war as listed in the Congressional authorization.
If you say that no WMD stockpiles were found (as Bush meant) - I agree.
I think the War was a good idea at the time, has served to concentrate the terrorists so we could kill them, and will result in a powerful ally to counter Iran.
Reactionary - your last statement is WHOLE 'nother issue. I tend to think we've created more terrorists than we've eliminated, but agree that IF Iraq is able to stablize and become a prosperous democracy then we may indeed in the long run have developed an important ally and history will eventually view President Bush in a much kinder light.
If you are interested this is my view on the GWOT (Written way back in September of 2001 (immediately after 9-11)
):
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So nice try assuming AGAIN, floridabound, what I do, who I am, and what I believe in. You must be proud of yourself for your "wisdom".
