crwtom 0 #101 October 28, 2005 QuoteQuote There were plenty of reports and agencies disputing the claims of WMD prior to the war. Bush just chose to ignore them. Those people choose to read the reports that suggested Saddam really had meant his promises this time, and ignored all the past times where he didn't, or where he used the weapons. How do people believe that WMDs were really the issue of this war? Really aske yourself this. Suppose the Bush Admin had decided to observe due process and let the weapons inspector finish their jobs. Suppose, just hypothetically, they had come back with irrefutable evidence that there cannot be any significangt stock piles of WMDs in Iraq. (as there weren't) Do you, even for a second, seriously believe the admin would have said "oh well, our bad! Good we have nothing to worry about and can leave Saddan alone." Iraq was in the cross hairs of world order ideologues, Strauss and Wohlstaetter disciples, the PNAC activists, the disgruntled Bush sr ex offcicials, who found their way into the Bush jr Admin long before 9/11 and long befor e any talk about WMDs. The latter incidents were vehicles not reasons for the war. Cheers, T ******************************************************************* Fear causes hesitation, and hesitation will cause your worst fears to come true Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #102 October 28, 2005 Quote How do people believe that WMDs were really the issue of this war? Really aske yourself this. Suppose the Bush Admin had decided to observe due process and let the weapons inspector finish their jobs. Suppose, just hypothetically, they had come back with irrefutable evidence that there cannot be any significangt stock piles of WMDs in Iraq. (as there weren't) Hell, suppose Saddam had surrendered per Bush's final demand? Bush wouldn't have been prepared for it, hence the rather ridiculous demands made. Once the war machine was put in motion to the middle east, nothing was stopping it. So yes, the weapons were really the side show, but if people want to debate the validity of it for the war, Iraq's record in the 90s after the first war was not a good one. If you have a felon that has violated parole countless times since getting out of jail, one short stretch of good behavior doesn't lead you to give him the benefit of the doubt. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #103 October 28, 2005 QuoteEven your "facts" (notice no link to the actual memorandums) point out there is no hard link between Iraq and 9/11. Oh, I see. Unless the memo was posted on the internet, it's not credible. Forget the fact that most of the information was double and triple sourced, if it's not on the internet, it didn't happen. "Intelligence reporting included in the 16-page memo comes from a variety of domestic and foreign agencies, including the FBI, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the Central Intelligence Agency, and the National Security Agency. Much of the evidence is detailed, conclusive, and corroborated by multiple sources." QuoteWas Shakir an Iraqi agent? Does he provide a connection between Saddam Hussein and September 11? We don't know. That sentence only has to do with one of the voluminous ties the article points out. Funny you only chose to respond to the last sentence. Did you actually read it or just skim to the end looking for one tie out of many the article admits was uncertain? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
markd_nscr986 0 #104 October 28, 2005 ***Anyway, she was like, "In socialism you can be anything you want" I said, "what if we all what to be actors?" She said, "well, you could." I said, "But who will work the really shitty jobs and who WANTS to work in them anyway?" No answer. That is absolutely priceless!Marc SCR 6046 SCS 3004 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Zenister 0 #105 October 28, 2005 QuoteQuote The truth is, every intelligence agency in the world believed Hussein had and would use WMD. not true.. believing he WANTED them and would use them IF he had them is not the same as believing he HAS them.. the shelf life on the WMDs WE SOLD him had long since expired under ideal storage conditions.. Iraq could in no way maintain ideal storage conditions...____________________________________ Those who fail to learn from the past are simply Doomed. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ReBirth 0 #106 October 28, 2005 I appologize for the tongue in cheek generalization. However you didn't address the point that your claim was invalid. There were plenty of dissenting voices in the intelligence community. Bush, et al. picked and chose what they wanted to believe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites ReBirth 0 #107 October 28, 2005 QuoteIraq was in the cross hairs of world order ideologues, Strauss and Wohlstaetter disciples, the PNAC activists, the disgruntled Bush sr ex offcicials, who found their way into the Bush jr Admin long before 9/11 and long befor e any talk about WMDs. The latter incidents were vehicles not reasons for the war. Bam! It's been the agenda of The New World Order N/K/A The Project for a New American Century for at least 15 years. They have a published goal of installing a democratic base in the middle east to serve as a base of operations for further military action (think our involvement in central and south america). Many members of this group, commonly referred to as The Wolfowitz Kabal, are key players in the current administration. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tso-d_chris 0 #108 October 29, 2005 QuoteCommunism as a form of an economy as you put it increase its revenue by killing it's citizens by the millions. One of many reasons that form of (economy) fails every time its tried. As long as you can say that with a straight face... I challenge you to provide a single country that has attempted to use an economic system that closely resembles Marx's "design" in anything other than name. USSR-- Nope. PROC-- Nope. Do you really think capitalism is without it's own blood trail? I'm not advocating communism, but at least I am able to see past false cold war propaganda. For Great Deals on Gear Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tso-d_chris 0 #109 October 29, 2005 QuoteMarx had the luxury of working in the fantasy world. As did Adam Smith. QuoteI've got a picture of a poster from one of the Berkeley Marxist books stores after the fall of the USSR that proclaimed the death of fake communism, long live real communism! While we've seen capitalistic nations in all forms, we haven't seem a nice communist one yet and we're approaching 100 years soon (87 if we start with the fall of the Czar). Until we see a counterexample, seems quite fair to equate tyranny and communism. Lack of an example does not logically allow substituting an alternate form of government sharing the same name in its place for sake of comparison. I don't have any cocoa in my pantry. I'll just eat some macaroni to see if I like cocoa better than popcorn. Yeah, um, that makes sense, same logic... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tso-d_chris 0 #110 October 29, 2005 QuoteI met this girl once and went to hang out with her at a coffeeshop. She and her friends were big fans of socialism and communism and were going to protest by not voting. Anyway, she was like, "In socialism you can be anything you want" I said, "what if we all what to be actors?" She said, "well, you could." I said, "But who will work the really shitty jobs and who WANTS to work in them anyway?" No answer. Same thing about going to med school for years only to have the exact same amount of money as the guy slinging burgers. Incentive? Pure capitalism and pure coummunism are very nice on paper. The PURE forms just don't actually work in the real world. Greed will destroy both models quite quickly. Both rely far to much on the goodness of all humans. Exactly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tso-d_chris 0 #111 October 29, 2005 QuoteOh, I see. Unless the memo was posted on the internet, it's not credible. Forget the fact that most of the information was double and triple sourced, if it's not on the internet, it didn't happen. Kindly point out the part where your "facts" show a direct link between Iraq and the 9/11 attacks. They don't. You are reading too much into them. Never mind that we have no reason to believe the memos were not based on the same faulty intelligence that was relied upon to justify the invasion of Iraq. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gawain 0 #112 October 29, 2005 QuoteQuotejust ask the Iranians if they thought Iraq had chemical weapons. Ask the Kurds. Ask US. Ask the world who witnessed their use in the 1980s. The question would be when they stopped having them..... On a parallel, when the US bombed Japan in WWII, the world did not know that we had expended our only two weapons after Nagasaki. No one knew how many we had. Japan's Emperor still chose wisely to surrender.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #113 October 29, 2005 QuoteQuoteOh, I see. Unless the memo was posted on the internet, it's not credible. Forget the fact that most of the information was double and triple sourced, if it's not on the internet, it didn't happen. Kindly point out the part where your "facts" show a direct link between Iraq and the 9/11 attacks. They don't. You are reading too much into them. Never mind that we have no reason to believe the memos were not based on the same faulty intelligence that was relied upon to justify the invasion of Iraq. The whole article establishes a multitude of links. Take your pick. If you can't see it, you are reading it with blinders on. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites tso-d_chris 0 #114 October 29, 2005 QuoteThe whole article establishes a multitude of links. Take your pick. Actually, if you read your article, it shows the possibility of minor connections between Saddam and al Queida, but since I had asked for evidence linking Iraq and 9/11, your article comes up totally short. Additionally, we have no reason to believe the memos which are referred to were not based wholly on faulty intelligence. If the war in Iraq has taught us anything, it has shown us that our intelligence capabilities are not as good we thought. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites purnell 0 #115 October 29, 2005 QuoteI appologize for the tongue in cheek generalization. However you didn't address the point that your claim was invalid. There were plenty of dissenting voices in the intelligence community. Bush, et al. picked and chose what they wanted to believe. No worries. I'm guilty of making my own sweeping generalizations. So I'll modify to state that many in intelligence agencies domestic and foreign believed Iraq had WMD. But to support your point: www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?031027fa_fact A good read for anyone on either side of the issues at hand and great synopsis of the intelligence breakdowns, Plame affair etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Gravitymaster 0 #116 October 31, 2005 QuoteQuoteThe whole article establishes a multitude of links. Take your pick. Actually, if you read your article, it shows the possibility of minor connections between Saddam and al Queida, but since I had asked for evidence linking Iraq and 9/11, your article comes up totally short. Additionally, we have no reason to believe the memos which are referred to were not based wholly on faulty intelligence. If the war in Iraq has taught us anything, it has shown us that our intelligence capabilities are not as good we thought. By your logic, we could say the Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11 either and we shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #117 October 31, 2005 QuoteQuoteSometimes it sounds like we're playing "six degrees of Kevin Bacon." I wonder how we can link up Kevin Bacon and Saddam Hussein? Wendy W. Saddam Hussein met with Rumsfeld Rumsfeld worked for Ronald Reagan Ronald Reagan was in "The Killers" (1964) with John Cassavetes who was in "Tempest" (1982) with Susan Sarandon who was in "The Whitches of Eastwick" (1987) with Jack Nicholson who was in "A Few Good Men" (1992) with Kevin Bacon I think Jack Nicholson might have married Saddam Hussein and bought him a house before divorcing him. That would make the link even closer. Jack has married a lot of people. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 4 5 Next Page 5 of 5 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
ReBirth 0 #106 October 28, 2005 I appologize for the tongue in cheek generalization. However you didn't address the point that your claim was invalid. There were plenty of dissenting voices in the intelligence community. Bush, et al. picked and chose what they wanted to believe. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
ReBirth 0 #107 October 28, 2005 QuoteIraq was in the cross hairs of world order ideologues, Strauss and Wohlstaetter disciples, the PNAC activists, the disgruntled Bush sr ex offcicials, who found their way into the Bush jr Admin long before 9/11 and long befor e any talk about WMDs. The latter incidents were vehicles not reasons for the war. Bam! It's been the agenda of The New World Order N/K/A The Project for a New American Century for at least 15 years. They have a published goal of installing a democratic base in the middle east to serve as a base of operations for further military action (think our involvement in central and south america). Many members of this group, commonly referred to as The Wolfowitz Kabal, are key players in the current administration. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #108 October 29, 2005 QuoteCommunism as a form of an economy as you put it increase its revenue by killing it's citizens by the millions. One of many reasons that form of (economy) fails every time its tried. As long as you can say that with a straight face... I challenge you to provide a single country that has attempted to use an economic system that closely resembles Marx's "design" in anything other than name. USSR-- Nope. PROC-- Nope. Do you really think capitalism is without it's own blood trail? I'm not advocating communism, but at least I am able to see past false cold war propaganda. For Great Deals on Gear Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #109 October 29, 2005 QuoteMarx had the luxury of working in the fantasy world. As did Adam Smith. QuoteI've got a picture of a poster from one of the Berkeley Marxist books stores after the fall of the USSR that proclaimed the death of fake communism, long live real communism! While we've seen capitalistic nations in all forms, we haven't seem a nice communist one yet and we're approaching 100 years soon (87 if we start with the fall of the Czar). Until we see a counterexample, seems quite fair to equate tyranny and communism. Lack of an example does not logically allow substituting an alternate form of government sharing the same name in its place for sake of comparison. I don't have any cocoa in my pantry. I'll just eat some macaroni to see if I like cocoa better than popcorn. Yeah, um, that makes sense, same logic... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #110 October 29, 2005 QuoteI met this girl once and went to hang out with her at a coffeeshop. She and her friends were big fans of socialism and communism and were going to protest by not voting. Anyway, she was like, "In socialism you can be anything you want" I said, "what if we all what to be actors?" She said, "well, you could." I said, "But who will work the really shitty jobs and who WANTS to work in them anyway?" No answer. Same thing about going to med school for years only to have the exact same amount of money as the guy slinging burgers. Incentive? Pure capitalism and pure coummunism are very nice on paper. The PURE forms just don't actually work in the real world. Greed will destroy both models quite quickly. Both rely far to much on the goodness of all humans. Exactly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #111 October 29, 2005 QuoteOh, I see. Unless the memo was posted on the internet, it's not credible. Forget the fact that most of the information was double and triple sourced, if it's not on the internet, it didn't happen. Kindly point out the part where your "facts" show a direct link between Iraq and the 9/11 attacks. They don't. You are reading too much into them. Never mind that we have no reason to believe the memos were not based on the same faulty intelligence that was relied upon to justify the invasion of Iraq. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gawain 0 #112 October 29, 2005 QuoteQuotejust ask the Iranians if they thought Iraq had chemical weapons. Ask the Kurds. Ask US. Ask the world who witnessed their use in the 1980s. The question would be when they stopped having them..... On a parallel, when the US bombed Japan in WWII, the world did not know that we had expended our only two weapons after Nagasaki. No one knew how many we had. Japan's Emperor still chose wisely to surrender.So I try and I scream and I beg and I sigh Just to prove I'm alive, and it's alright 'Cause tonight there's a way I'll make light of my treacherous life Make light! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #113 October 29, 2005 QuoteQuoteOh, I see. Unless the memo was posted on the internet, it's not credible. Forget the fact that most of the information was double and triple sourced, if it's not on the internet, it didn't happen. Kindly point out the part where your "facts" show a direct link between Iraq and the 9/11 attacks. They don't. You are reading too much into them. Never mind that we have no reason to believe the memos were not based on the same faulty intelligence that was relied upon to justify the invasion of Iraq. The whole article establishes a multitude of links. Take your pick. If you can't see it, you are reading it with blinders on. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tso-d_chris 0 #114 October 29, 2005 QuoteThe whole article establishes a multitude of links. Take your pick. Actually, if you read your article, it shows the possibility of minor connections between Saddam and al Queida, but since I had asked for evidence linking Iraq and 9/11, your article comes up totally short. Additionally, we have no reason to believe the memos which are referred to were not based wholly on faulty intelligence. If the war in Iraq has taught us anything, it has shown us that our intelligence capabilities are not as good we thought. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
purnell 0 #115 October 29, 2005 QuoteI appologize for the tongue in cheek generalization. However you didn't address the point that your claim was invalid. There were plenty of dissenting voices in the intelligence community. Bush, et al. picked and chose what they wanted to believe. No worries. I'm guilty of making my own sweeping generalizations. So I'll modify to state that many in intelligence agencies domestic and foreign believed Iraq had WMD. But to support your point: www.newyorker.com/fact/content/?031027fa_fact A good read for anyone on either side of the issues at hand and great synopsis of the intelligence breakdowns, Plame affair etc. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Gravitymaster 0 #116 October 31, 2005 QuoteQuoteThe whole article establishes a multitude of links. Take your pick. Actually, if you read your article, it shows the possibility of minor connections between Saddam and al Queida, but since I had asked for evidence linking Iraq and 9/11, your article comes up totally short. Additionally, we have no reason to believe the memos which are referred to were not based wholly on faulty intelligence. If the war in Iraq has taught us anything, it has shown us that our intelligence capabilities are not as good we thought. By your logic, we could say the Taliban had nothing to do with 9/11 either and we shouldn't have invaded Afghanistan. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #117 October 31, 2005 QuoteQuoteSometimes it sounds like we're playing "six degrees of Kevin Bacon." I wonder how we can link up Kevin Bacon and Saddam Hussein? Wendy W. Saddam Hussein met with Rumsfeld Rumsfeld worked for Ronald Reagan Ronald Reagan was in "The Killers" (1964) with John Cassavetes who was in "Tempest" (1982) with Susan Sarandon who was in "The Whitches of Eastwick" (1987) with Jack Nicholson who was in "A Few Good Men" (1992) with Kevin Bacon I think Jack Nicholson might have married Saddam Hussein and bought him a house before divorcing him. That would make the link even closer. Jack has married a lot of people. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
