Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-17-2014, 12:21 AM
 
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma
30,976 posts, read 21,641,969 times
Reputation: 9676

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by burdell View Post
Why do conservatives spread so many delusional lies?
Simply because the hatred and resentment that conservatives feel in their hearts and souls against liberals is so deep and intense. And you won't a single conservative who doesn't feel that way. Not one single one.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-17-2014, 12:26 AM
 
461 posts, read 556,232 times
Reputation: 444
100,000 Iraqis dead?

More like 1 million.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 01:04 AM
 
Location: Old Mother Idaho
29,218 posts, read 22,371,062 times
Reputation: 23858
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fiddlehead View Post
For what?

For Halliburton, of course.
Yes. At least in part. Cheney, Wolfowitz and Rumsfeld were all leading members of a neo-Con group called Project for the New American Century, which was founded in 1997. Signatories included William Abrams, Jeb Bush, William Bennett, John Bolton, John McCain, Jeanne Kirkpatrick, and many other well known conservatives.
The PNAC Statement of Principles, released on 3 June 1997 stated:

As the 20th century draws to a close, the United States stands as the world's pre-eminent power. Having led the West to victory in the Cold War, America faces an opportunity and a challenge: Does the United States have the vision to build upon the achievements of past decades? Does the United States have the resolve to shape a new century favorable to American principles and interests?

The groups responses to these questions were:
- more money spent for defense and enlarging the military significantly
- strengthen ties will our allies and challenge those who oppose us
- promote the cause of economic and political freedom abroad
- extending our power abroad in an international order friendly to our security, prosperity, and principles

The way to meet those objectives was a doctrine that Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, and Cheney, and some other members developed was the ouster of Saddam Hussein in Iraq, clearing the way to a democratic Iraqi government, which in turn would become a permanent American ally smack dab in the heart of the Middle East.

Their first efforts toward this goal were directed at President Bill Clinton, and resulted in the creating and passage of the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. Clinton signed the act, but was loathe to go after Hussein, and in 1998, there were hotter places of contention on the planet- Bosnia was more on Clinton's mind than Iraq by far, so nothing happened in Iraq.

But when Cheney positioned himself to be Bush's Vice President, things changed. He stacked the Bush cabinet with fellow members of the PNAC and made Rumsfeld the Sec. of Defense. They all envisioned an overwhelming military force permanently positioned in a democratic Iraq as both a way of enforcing peace in the region and changing, over time, the governments of Iran, Syria, Libya, and the other important nations all into American style democracies.
Such a plan would be good for business and good for building a new American empire in the richest place on Earth.

G.W. Bush was never a member of the PNAC. And he had no foreign policy in mind at all when he became President. He let Cheney do all those decisions.

Essentially, when we went into Iraq a couple of years later, the Bush administration under Cheney and Rumsfeld's leadership, with Wolfowitz and other members inside the administration as close presidential advisors, the PNAC's plans and policies were set into action from the very first.

There was no exit policy. American soldiers were intended to occupy Iraq forever, in similar fashion to our permanent presence in Europe after WWII.

By 2006, with the war won and the occupation becoming a catastrophe, facing a Democratic controlled House, Bush began exerting his authority for the first time, and fired Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, and all the other cabinet member who were connected to the PNAC, and began listening to his Generals about getting out of Iraq. Bush also began cutting Cheney out of all foreign policy decisions and isolating him, reducing his influence in the re-vamped Administration.

Later that year, the Project for a New American Century quietly folded up and disappeared into the night forever.

Project for the New American Century - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Clique that Sold Us the Iraq War
Paul Wolfowitz - PNAC and the ”New Pearl Harbor” — News of Interest.TV
Project for the New American Century (PNAC): Cheney's Monstrous Scheme

… but all the members are still around. And their influence remains within the GOP.

Here is a report of where they went shortly after the PNAC was disbanded:
THE ARCHITECTS OF WAR: WHERE ARE THEY NOW? | ThinkProgress

Dick Cheney is an interesting guy. After he quit his career as a Representative in the House and joined the Rumsfeld in the Ford administration, every President he worked for afterward, and all his immediate bosses all fell into some disaster or other that damaged them in office and sometimes ruined their careers, but Cheney always emerged unscathed and progressed upward in future positions. He went from staffer to advisor to assistant to boss, always quietky and in the background, allowing others to take the limelight.

He was often the cause of disaster, but was never the victim of them. If Clinton and Reagan were Teflon coated, Cheney is made of solid Teflon. Nothing ever stuck to him, and still doesn't to this day. Even when the PNAC fell completely into shambles, Cheney made sure Halliburton, his baby, made out very well until the very end of our Iraqi departure.

Last edited by banjomike; 06-17-2014 at 01:14 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 01:23 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,707,823 times
Reputation: 22474
Quote:
Originally Posted by StillwaterTownie View Post
Simply because the hatred and resentment that conservatives feel in their hearts and souls against liberals is so deep and intense. And you won't a single conservative who doesn't feel that way. Not one single one.
It's because of the way liberals literally worship their politicians. They follow blindly, never question anything.

Just like with the Iraq war, liberals couldn't stop swooning over Bill Clinton bombing Iraq when he wanted to keep the Monica story off the front pages and while liberals condemned Bush for sending troops there, they utterly adored Obama for sending troops to Poland and now again to Iraq.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 01:40 AM
 
Location: Dublin, CA
3,807 posts, read 4,276,406 times
Reputation: 3984
So you and everyone else aren't paying 10 dollars (plus) a gallon for gas. How much and how more simple can it be?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 04:28 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,791,864 times
Reputation: 24863
The policy was a success as most of that 1,7 Trillion was spent on domestic contractors like Halliburton et al. Corporate welfare at its most successful. MISSION ACCOMPLISHED!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 07:05 AM
 
13,900 posts, read 9,773,129 times
Reputation: 6856
The Iraq War is the biggest foreign policy mistake the USA has ever made. This will be George W. Bush's legacy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 07:15 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,792,616 times
Reputation: 2587
Quote:
Originally Posted by KRAMERCAT View Post
'Robert Gates view of the Obama and Bush administrations in his new book has certainly created controversy.

It is horrendous to learn that any president might send soldiers into war knowing the futility of their mission.

[MOD CUT/copyright violation]


We are ignoring the most important thing Robert Gates has said | Rare

For what? Why, we let the terrorists win, didnt we? Sounds like something major to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 07:16 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,792,616 times
Reputation: 2587
Quote:
Originally Posted by DoniDanko View Post
For what? Weapons of mass destruction and revenge.
I presume you are being sarcastic.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-17-2014, 07:21 AM
 
Location: Someplace Wonderful
5,177 posts, read 4,792,616 times
Reputation: 2587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydive Outlaw View Post
Saddam NEVER had WMDs. . . . .


He acted like he did: because in his view - Iran was more of a threat to Iraq and he had to maintain the position that he had WMDs as a deterrent to Iran taking future military action against Iraq after the first Gulf War. He didn't fear the US as a threat to his power - but had to make the Iranians think that he had WMDs to keep that country from initiating any future wars.

Saddam NEVER had WMDs and Bush and Cheney as well as the CIA knew that he did NOT have WMDs but used that as a basis for starting the war.

If one really wanted to know the roots of the I2nd Gulf War, one might read up on CURVEBALL
In February 2011, Rafid Ahmed Alwan al-Janabi admitted for the first time that he lied about his story regarding Iraq's secret biological weapons program.[8] He also admitted to being shocked that his false story was used as a justification for the Iraq War but proud that the fabrications helped topple Saddam Hussein.

According to the Danish "The man who lied the World into War" film (2010/2011 update, basing on sources) after he was found by the document makers and they put questions to the chief security and spy services of his new home country, he lost his "work" (in a company found and described by the document makers as a cover with his position of "marketing specialist") and "salary with flat". Then, when he had to get back to the social one-room flat with social security help-salary, he phoned the documentary staff proposing an interview for the €40000 (before the UK newspaper article). He also showed papers which, according to him, clearly proved that a contract between him and this "cover company" had been signed for the 15 years, starting in the 1999/2000, with a relatively high monthly salary of €3000.[27][28]
Guess what ... we were all fooled because of our biases, our desires.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:33 AM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top