 |
|
05-23-2008, 02:29 AM
|
 |
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,956
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by areyoushittin'me?
I see your point about Afghanistan but I submit more could have been done...look at the vast rise in poppy production...we should be contributing to alternative programs.
As for going after bin Laden...to be quite honest with you, I'm thinking greater pursuit of him would be good...even if that meant expanding our operation into Pakistan...I'm not all that impressed with that relationship as it stands...heck, we get someone like that Khan guy selling nuke secrets and what do we do about it? Essentially nada...it needs to be impressed upon them that they need to work more closely with us or we would deal with things ourself.
As to bombing Saddam's palaces, I figure that would accomplish two things...first, I do believe it would get Saddam to cooperate because it would show that he was powerless against us which would have been an embarrasment that he could no have stood by and let happen in front of his people and secondly...it would have sent a very strong message to the UN that I wasn't going to waste my time screwing around with them and they better get with the program.
In any case, it couldn't be any worse than the mess we are in now and would have saved many soldiers lives and countless billions of dollars.
Thank you for your response in any case...generally, I don't get any response to my "liberal tree hugging bullshit".
|
So, instead of invading Iraq you would have invaded Pakistan?
|
05-23-2008, 02:31 AM
|
|
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,956
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by cat's meow
Consider what the Iraqi people have been through in the past 6 years and how close Saddam was to getting ousted by his own people after Desert Fox. There was a better way to do this no doubt. There is still no evidence this will end up well in the end; nothing has been determined and there is a great deal of infighting between sects. Another Saddam may very well emerge.
|
How close was Saddam to being ousted after Desert Fox? |
05-23-2008, 02:35 AM
|
|
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,956
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by areyoushittin'me?
The part I highlighted in red is the part I find rather fascinating...how can you justify holding him responsible for something he could not do? As it turns out, it appears that most of what we did not destroy in '91 was dealt with by the inspectors early on and I think most of the Saddam obfuscation was more to try and act tougher than he really was...he was nearly powerless on an international scale.
Yes, he was a dumbshit and had no clue what that cowboy we've got in office was capable of but I don't think he was nearly the threat he was purported to be.
|
If he could not provide an accounting, well, that was his problem, wasn't it? The point is that the burden of proof on the WMD's was on Iraq and not on the Coalition - and I haven't found anyone to come forward and state that we should have just "taken Saddam's word for it" that he had destroyed them. |
05-23-2008, 02:45 AM
|
 |
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Huh?
Posts: 6,311
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cordelier
So, instead of invading Iraq you would have invaded Pakistan?
|
Yup, if that's where bin Laden led me...not only that, I'd had a heck of a lot more support from the International community than Bush had for going into Iraq.
__________________
"All the problems we face in the United States today can be traced to an unenlightened immigration policy on the part of the American Indian."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
OBAMA/PEROT
|
05-23-2008, 02:47 AM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Huh?
Posts: 6,311
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cordelier
If he could not provide an accounting, well, that was his problem, wasn't it? The point is that the burden of proof on the WMD's was on Iraq and not on the Coalition - and I haven't found anyone to come forward and state that we should have just "taken Saddam's word for it" that he had destroyed them.
|
The burden of proof was on the inspectors and they were making progress...anyway, thanks for the debate...I'm gone for tonight.
__________________
"All the problems we face in the United States today can be traced to an unenlightened immigration policy on the part of the American Indian."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
OBAMA/PEROT
|
05-23-2008, 02:50 AM
|
|
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,956
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by areyoushittin'me?
Yup, if that's where bin Laden led me...not only that, I'd had a heck of a lot more support from the International community than Bush had for going into Iraq.
|
Um... No, actually I think the world would have turned against you the moment you crossed the border. |
05-23-2008, 02:52 AM
|
|
Political Mastermind
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,956
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by areyoushittin'me?
The burden of proof was on the inspectors and they were making progress...anyway, thanks for the debate...I'm gone for tonight.
|
The inspectors were there to verify or disprove Iraq's WMD claims. Resolution 687 put the burden of proof on the Iraqis themselves.
Okay - I look forward to taking this up again with you  Have a good'un! |
05-23-2008, 10:40 AM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Huh?
Posts: 6,311
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cordelier
Um... No, actually I think the world would have turned against you the moment you crossed the border.
|
I don't agree...the world was with us in Afghanistan...if we had pursued bin Laden to the border then it would have been up to Pakistan to give him up...if they couldn't do that then they would have two choices...either work with us or get the hell out of the way.
The problem now is that we haven't got a clue as to where he is.
Another point of distinction that I should make is that my hunt for him would involve more covert activities as opposed to overt aggression.
One of the downsides to going into Iraq is that it put too many things on the front page and that wasn't necessarily a positive thing.
__________________
"All the problems we face in the United States today can be traced to an unenlightened immigration policy on the part of the American Indian."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
OBAMA/PEROT
|
05-23-2008, 10:51 AM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Huh?
Posts: 6,311
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cordelier
The inspectors were there to verify or disprove Iraq's WMD claims. Resolution 687 put the burden of proof on the Iraqis themselves.
Okay - I look forward to taking this up again with you Have a good'un! |
I know the wording...the point is, he made claims that we didn't believe...as Blix said, progress was being made...what did they find to disprove the claims?
Not very damn much...Al-Samoud II missles with a range of 13 miles over that allowed...whoopieteedoo.
Not very damn much...aluminum tubes "that could only be used for" something they weren't any good for...whoopieteedoo.
How about mobile chemical labs that didn't turn out to be such...whoopieteedoo.
Since we never found anything that we claim Saddam was lying about would that make us out to be the liars?
The only means we had of "proving" anything was through the efforts of the inspectors...that's why I say the "burden of proof" was on the inspectors.
__________________
"All the problems we face in the United States today can be traced to an unenlightened immigration policy on the part of the American Indian."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
OBAMA/PEROT
|
05-23-2008, 11:09 AM
|
|
Machiavelli Incarnate
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Huh?
Posts: 6,311
|
|
I went in search of something to share with you and couldn't readily find it...I will probably need to go back into some of the forums I used to frequent some years ago but in the mean time check this out...it might give you a bit of perspective as to why I don't buy into the Bushshit...
Iraq on the Record
Quote:
Findings
Number of Misleading Statements. The Iraq on the Record database contains 237
misleading statements about the threat posed by Iraq that were made by President Bush, Vice
President Cheney, Secretary Rumsfeld, Secretary Powell, and National Security Advisor
Rice. These statements were made in 125 separate appearances, consisting of 40 speeches,
26 press conferences and briefings, 53 interviews, 4 written statements, and 2 congressional
testimonies. Most of the statements in the database were misleading because they expressed
certainty where none existed or failed to acknowledge the doubts of intelligence officials.
Ten of the statements were simply false.
|
Quote:
Timing of the Statements. The statements began at least a year before the commencement
of hostilities in Iraq, when Vice President Cheney stated on March 17, 2002: "We know they
have biological and chemical weapons." The Administration’s misleading statements
continued through January 22, 2004, when Vice President Cheney insisted: "there’s
overwhelming evidence that there was a connection between al-Qaeda and the Iraqi
government." Most of the misleading statements about Iraq -- 161 statements -- were made
prior to the start of the war. But 76 misleading statements were made by the five
Administration officials after the start of the war to justify the decision to go to war.
The 30-day period with the greatest number of misleading statements was the period before
the congressional vote on the Iraq war resolution. Congress voted on the measure on October
10 and October 11, 2002. From September 8 through October 8, 2002, the five officials
made 64 misleading statements in 16 public appearances. A large number of misleading
statements were also made during the two months before the war began. Between January 19
and March 19, 2003, the five officials made 48 misleading statements in 26 public
appearances.
|
Quote:
Topics of the Statements. The 237 misleading statements can be divided into four
categories. The five officials made 11 statements that claimed that Iraq posed an urgent
threat; 81 statements that exaggerated Iraq’s nuclear activities; 84 statements that overstated
Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons capabilities; and 61 statements that misrepresented
Iraq’s ties to al Qaeda.
|
Quote:
Statements by President Bush. Between September 12, 2002, and July 17, 2003, President
Bush made 55 misleading statements about the threat posed by Iraq in 27 separate public
appearances. On October 7, 2002, three days before the congressional votes on the Iraqi war
resolution, President Bush gave a speech in Cincinnati, Ohio, with 11 misleading statements,
the most by any of the five officials in a single appearance.
|
Quote:
Statements by Vice President Cheney. Between March 17, 2002, and January 22, 2004,
Vice President Cheney made 51 misleading statements about the threat posed by Iraq in 25
separate public appearances.
|
Quote:
Statements by Secretary Rumsfeld. Between May 22, 2002, and November 2, 2003,
Secretary Rumsfeld made 52 misleading statements about the threat posed by Iraq in 23
separate public appearances.
|
Quote:
Statements by Secretary Powell. Between April 3, 2002, and October 3, 2003, Secretary
Powell made 50 misleading statements about the threat posed by Iraq in 34 separate public
appearances.
|
Quote:
Statements by National Security Advisor Rice. Between September 8, 2002, and
September 28, 2003, National Security Advisor Rice made 29 misleading statements about
the threat posed by Iraq in 16 separate public appearances.
|
__________________
"All the problems we face in the United States today can be traced to an unenlightened immigration policy on the part of the American Indian."
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
OBAMA/PEROT
|
| Thread Tools |
|
|
| Display Modes |
 Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
|
