Official Pentagon study: No credible link found between Saddam Hussein and the al-Qaeda network (Afghanistan, Baghdad)
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.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,330 posts, read 54,411,082 times
Reputation: 40736
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by texdav
Most times it is just in order to attack the political opponent. In this case Bush.Saddam needed to go and was the most dangerous man as John Kerry said in a interview from the 90's.He actaully called for regime chnage in the interview[b]. I see so much flip-floping now days.
"Make no mistake, the United States will hunt down and punish those responsible for these cowardly acts," -G.W. Bush 9/11/01
"I don't know where bin Laden is. I have no idea and really don't care. It's not that important. It's not our priority."- G.W. Bush, 3/13/02
I agree, one need only look toward the White House to find the flip-flopping these days.
sometimes people forget that loyality to country doesn't equate to unquestioned loyality to Bush or government.
I didn't say that. I said that there is a clear line between good (the U.S.) and bad (Saddam/the former Iraqi government/al Qaeda and the Taliban).
Quote:
Yeah we are good guys,until we justify in our mind that we have a duty to free people of the world when they don't want to be like us.One guy on another borad recently told me that America has a duty to spread Democracy and our way of life to the world.That's rather delusional and tryannical IMO but in his mind that's being the "good guy".What it is forcing our will on others.
You should have stopped at "Yeah we are the good guys." And I disagree with that guy said about America having a duty to spread Democracy. We don't have a "duty," we do it because we are concerned about other countries and people... to the point our soldiers die for them.
Quote:
I'm for going after the Taliban,the problem is we gave the government a blank check to go after anybody and just "because" Bush says someone is a threat that doesn't mean we must not ask questions why,but to some it seems questioning this policy is somehow a act against patriotism while not stopping this blank check to go to war may actually bring down this country.
We don't have to be told by Bush that the Taliban is a threat; they obviously are.
There is absolutely no clear line separating good from bad where the US and Saddam Hussein/Taliban were concerned. How do you explain the wonderfully expensive relationship we had with him/them or the many productive business meetings we conducted both here and abroad? We were strange bed partners connected at the checkbook. Do good guys do business with bad guys and ignore their crimes against humanity or are they both pretty disgusting for their behavior?
America is concerned about its business interests and exploiting what others have, that's why our soldiers needlessly die, along with hundreds of thousands of innocent foreign civilians.
A country with a multi-trillion dollar defense establishment that is larger than all the other countries combined is threatened by...the Taliban?
Yeah, keep watching Fox. The rest of us however will be much better informed and capable of interpreting this reality being deliberately manufactured around us.
I made this arguement on these posts at least a year ago before it was known the present path of the war. When all the naysayers were saying we couldn't win. My quote, "We put boots on the gorund in Iraq because it was the heart of the nest. Didn't have a damn thing to do with WMD". Why is that such a hard concept? I also said at that time what I will reinforce now, "Guess what? it is working!". This is the genius of Bush and the military and the advisors. Bush didn't sit around and think up this alternative on his own. It doesn't happen that way folks. It is working and as time unfolds this scenario ,you will begin to see a new "Japan" in the midst of the middle east. That is,- if we "stay the course". If a nimrod like Obama is elected or a socialist twit like Hillary all bets are off. WMDs were always a laugh to anyone that has experienced anything in the military. Some of you folks are so tsk tsk to listen to when offering up the arguement of WMD.
In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.
Hillary Clinton 10/10/2002..
We did not go to war against Iraq because of September 11th attacks, even though Senator Clintor continues to try to argue that she was mislead about their connection.
There is absolutely no clear line separating good from bad where the US and Saddam Hussein/Taliban were concerned. How do you explain the wonderfully expensive relationship we had with him/them or the many productive business meetings we conducted both here and abroad? We were strange bed partners connected at the checkbook. Do good guys do business with bad guys and ignore their crimes against humanity or are they both pretty disgusting for their behavior?
America is concerned about its business interests and exploiting what others have, that's why our soldiers needlessly die, along with hundreds of thousands of innocent foreign civilians.
A country with a multi-trillion dollar defense establishment that is larger than all the other countries combined is threatened by...the Taliban?
Do you believe the U.S. in general is a good or evil country?
Quote:
Yeah, keep watching Fox. The rest of us however will be much better informed and capable of interpreting this reality being deliberately manufactured around us.
Okay, I'll keep watching Fox News and you keep watching those left-wing stations. Of which about 75% are anti-Bush.
If congress wasn't informed then;how would you think they are now? In fact now can we beleive anything that the media says when they reported the fact that we would lose 20,000 troops would die because of WMD's.Why was the UN interested in inspetions to the point of sancitons if they didn't believe there were WMD's. Saddam said in FBI interviews that he meant to make the world think he had WMD's to prevent a Iranian invasion;it worked too good for his own good. But then just as John Kerry said in ainterview after the first gulkf war that saddam hussin was the most dangerous person in the woprld and called for regime change by whatever means necessary.I saw the interview replayed recently.
I made this arguement on these posts at least a year ago before it was known the present path of the war. When all the naysayers were saying we couldn't win. My quote, "We put boots on the gorund in Iraq because it was the heart of the nest. Didn't have a damn thing to do with WMD". Why is that such a hard concept? I also said at that time what I will reinforce now, "Guess what? it is working!". This is the genius of Bush and the military and the advisors. Bush didn't sit around and think up this alternative on his own. It doesn't happen that way folks. It is working and as time unfolds this scenario ,you will begin to see a new "Japan" in the midst of the middle east. That is,- if we "stay the course". If a nimrod like Obama is elected or a socialist twit like Hillary all bets are off. WMDs were always a laugh to anyone that has experienced anything in the military. Some of you folks are so tsk tsk to listen to when offering up the arguement of WMD.
The Surge isn't working. The change in tactics (i.e., to having any tactics at all) is helping in its own limited way. Also helping are al-Sadr's ceasefire, by which he hopes to grease the skids for an American withdrawal, and the fact that the US is now paying as many as 80,000 former Suni terrorists in Anbar province to help fight al-Qaeda, since they figured out that they had no chance of gaining political power from an emerging Shia-Kurd majority and now see working with the US as their only remaining hope. These same guys were bloody terrorist insurgents not so many months ago, blowing stuff up, killing people and dumping their bodies all over town, but now they've suddenly gone back to being freedom-loving patriots who are joining us as important allies in the global war on terror. At least that's the story.
But it's admirable at least for the nerve of it that you claim a known outcome for a path that will not be followed, then set that as the standard against which the outcome of any path that actually might be followed should be measured. This is as good a cover as any for those still somehow stuck in the quagmire of supporting our serially senseless blundering in Iraq...
In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including Al Qaeda members, though there is apparently no evidence of his involvement in the terrible events of September 11, 2001.
Hillary Clinton 10/10/2002..
We did not go to war against Iraq because of September 11th attacks, even though Senator Clintor continues to try to argue that she was mislead about their connection.
Ms Clinton and the rest of Congress were repeatedly lied to and misled by the administration. The facts were that since the UN inspectors left, Saddam had done nothing to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, or his nuclear program. It was only disinformation that allowed anyone to draw such a conclusion. Nor did Iraq provide any materially relevant aid, comfort, and sanctuary to al Al Qaeda members, even though some of them injured in Agfhanistan were able to hide out north of the no-fly zone and sneak into Baghdad for medical attention. All allegations above and beyond that were examples of misleading and disinformation as well. The best that the administration ever had was laid out by a reluctant Colin Powell at his regretable UN dog-and-pony show, and nearly every sliver of it has been discredited since. This entire invasion was based on lies, and the administration knew full well that they were lies at the time. It's really quite incredible that some folks still don't...
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.
