Wikileaks and Iraq

[nanook 1]

I don't only see this as a failure of him as a person, but also a failure of his leadership to recognise his issues. His personality is not something that is rare. I have seen his type before; and his type follows a script to a tee. They may not realize this fact since they are usually in to themselves with self-importance or self-victimization. If you are an NCO for quite a spell, you see all types of personalities and sometimes can immediately see problems before they manifest themselves. I personally believe you can cultivate a positive Sailor or Soldier if you can catch these problems in time. Sometimes, though, it's easier to write them off as problem children and move to dismiss them with the many other service members who can easily take his place. Unfortunately, they can be in a place where they can cause great harm to National Security. This is the time to capitalize on their strenths and make them feel the importance that they really are and then after the fact bring them down to the fact that they belong to a greater piece of an organization where they, though important, are one of several important people in the mix. This takes a while and sometimes, despite your effort, they may never see the light. There, you have to watch them like a hawk.

The whole Wikileaks group do not comprehend the why and how of the damage they are inflicting. They are usually the disenfranchised self-important, maybe even self-victimized as previously stated and they don't realise how much their beliefs are trivial and sophomoric. Whether the wars are frivolous or not, it's really an excuse for them to act out. In a sense, they are a five year old child with a bic lighter.

_____________________________

"The trouble with quotes on the internet is that you can never know if they are genuine" - Abraham Lincoln

[freethefly 6]

Quote

The leaks illustrate pretty clearly the lies that you warmongers bought into.

As does General Shelton...

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/10/iraq-fiasco-due-bushs-lies/

Quote

The US had no reason to invade Iraq in 2003, and only did so because of "a series of lies" told to the American people by the Bush administration, says Gen. Hugh Shelton, who served for four years as the US's top military officer.

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[skipbelt 0]

let's be honest
bill and hillary clinton said there were wmd's , obuma said there were wmd's .
if there were no wmd's GWB didn't invent the lie , just agreed with the weight of intel.
if there were wmd's GWB is a hero , wait...
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/10/chemical-weapons-were-found-in-iraq.html

[freethefly 6]

Quote

let's be honest
bill and hillary clinton said there were wmd's , obuma said there were wmd's .
if there were no wmd's GWB didn't invent the lie , just agreed with the weight of intel.

if there were wmd's GWB is a hero , wait...

http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2010/10/chemical-weapons-were-found-in-iraq.html

You really should read more than just the headline...

Shachtman analyzes the Wikileaks trove. There's no evidence, however, that they were part of any ongoing program as claimed by the Bush administration:

The WMD diehards will likely find some comfort in these newly-WikiLeaked documents. Skeptics will note that these relatively small WMD stockpiles were hardly the kind of grave danger that the Bush administration presented in the run-up to the war.

Let's be honest, what Saddam had did not amount to a threat to the U.S., or anyone else for that matter.

Let's also be honest about how SH's chemical program came about.
I'll help you out...

http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/index.htm

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[SkyDekker 1,465]

Quote

We ignored Hitler. That worked out well.

Some in your country got very wealthy not ignoring Hitler.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

You really should read more than just the headline...

It seems you should as well

Quote

Shachtman analyzes the Wikileaks trove. There's no evidence, however, that they were part of any ongoing program as claimed by the Bush administration:

The WMD diehards will likely find some comfort in these newly-WikiLeaked documents. Skeptics will note that these relatively small WMD stockpiles were hardly the kind of grave danger that the Bush administration presented in the run-up to the war.

So it seems they did have them.

Quote

Let's also be honest about how SH's chemical program came about.
I'll help you out..

Most of us know that the US gave/sold them to him. The fact is that there was a UN resolution that he was supposed to show what he had done with his WMD's and he never complied with it. Also, on more than one occasion, Saddam did his best to hide what he had.

Lets us also not forget:

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country" --Gore, September 23,2003

"He will use those weapons of mass destruction again, as he has ten times since 1983."--Sandy Berger, Feb 18, 1998.

"Without question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime...now he is miscalculating America's response to his continued decit and his consistant grasp for weapons of mass destruction...So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real" --John F. Kerry, Jan 23, 2003.

Daschle, D-South Dakota, said the threat of Iraq's weapons programs "may not be imminent. But it is real. It is growing. And it cannot be ignored."

So you can try to blame it all on Bush.... But Gore and Kerry both thought Saddam had them as well.

[freethefly 6]

Oh, but I did read it!

Quote

Skeptics will note that these relatively small WMD stockpiles were hardly the kind of grave danger that the Bush administration presented in the run-up to the war.

There is no doubt that many jumped aboard the war wagon, like John Wayne. No doubt that many were wrong. General Shelton acknowledged that Bush was hesitant about going into Iraq. The problem, as it seems apparent, were the people who surrounded the President. He (Bush) would had done well to listen to Shelton and to his own father, instead of Cheney and Rumsfeld.
Shame so many had to die for what amounts to spit in the ocean.
Shame that many more will die now that Iraq is a far more dangerous place than when under the control of SH (as odd as that may seem.)

"...And once you're gone, you can't come back
When you're out of the blue and into the black."
Neil Young

[skipbelt 0]

libs are never satisfied ,they assert no WMD's , WMD's found , they assert no stockpiles no WMD's , stockpiles found, they assert no stockpiles of WMD's large enough to threaten U.S. we need tim allen to motorize the goalposts .
meanwhile wiki claims leaks were for good cause , busy stopping 2 wars , but what is their own disclosure position...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/23/AR2010102303774.html?sub=AR

[billvon 3,009]

>>Skeptics will note that these relatively small WMD stockpiles were hardly the
>>kind of grave danger that the Bush administration presented in the run-up
>>to the war.

>So it seems they did have them.

Nope, they didn't. To quote the article: "Remnants of Saddam’s toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained."

They did indeed find destroyed shells with chemical weapon residue, and yellowcake (unpurified uranium) still under the seals that the UN put on the storage facility. Neither could be described as "WMD stockpiles" by any sane person.

What about the mustard gas? From the article:

"Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict — and may have brewed up their own deadly agents... In August 2004, for instance, American forces surreptitiously purchased what they believed to be containers of liquid sulfur mustard, a toxic “blister agent” used as a chemical weapon since World War I. The troops tested the liquid, and “reported two positive results for blister.” "

So - the only active WMD agents they found in Iraq were made AFTER THE INVASION. Not only did the Iraq war utterly fail in its intent, it actually contributed to the development of chemical weapons by insurgents!

You just can't fail any more completely than that.

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

libs are never satisfied ,they assert no WMD's , WMD's found , they assert no stockpiles no WMD's , stockpiles found, they assert no stockpiles of WMD's large enough to threaten U.S.

You're wrong on all accounts. Again. See Bill's post #34.

Oh, P.S., your childish name-calling (which it is) insults all intelligent conservatives who challenged the justification for that war, too.

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

Quote

We ignored Hitler. That worked out well.

Some in your country got very wealthy not ignoring Hitler.

Millions of people in many countries got very dead because Hitler was ignored.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[skipbelt 0]

you're claiming you're intelligent , conservative or both ?

[Belgian_Draft 0]

Quote

So - the only active WMD agents they found in Iraq were made AFTER THE INVASION. Not only did the Iraq war utterly fail in its intent, it actually contributed to the development of chemical weapons by insurgents!

You just can't fail any more completely than that.

Whether the war failed in its intent depends on the observer. If you believe Bush and accept his reasoning that there were WMD's in Iraq and they must be found & destroyed then, yes, the war failed.
If, on the other hand, you don't believe Bush and feel WMD's were a trumped up excuse to invade and oust Saddam then, no, it wasn't a failure but a verified success.

HAMMER:
Originally employed as a weapon of war, the hammer nowadays is used as a
kind of divining rod to locate the most expensive parts adjacent the
object we are trying to hit.

[turtlespeed 221]

Quote

Quote

So - the only active WMD agents they found in Iraq were made AFTER THE INVASION. Not only did the Iraq war utterly fail in its intent, it actually contributed to the development of chemical weapons by insurgents!

You just can't fail any more completely than that.

Whether the war failed in its intent depends on the observer. If you believe Bush and accept his reasoning that there were WMD's in Iraq and they must be found & destroyed then, yes, the war failed.
If, on the other hand, you don't believe Bush and feel WMD's were a trumped up excuse to invade and oust Saddam then, no, it wasn't a failure but a verified success.

Well Saddam and most of his family is dead aren't they?

Onle less genocidist around, eh?

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Amazon 7]

Quote

Quote

Quote

So - the only active WMD agents they found in Iraq were made AFTER THE INVASION. Not only did the Iraq war utterly fail in its intent, it actually contributed to the development of chemical weapons by insurgents!

You just can't fail any more completely than that.

Whether the war failed in its intent depends on the observer. If you believe Bush and accept his reasoning that there were WMD's in Iraq and they must be found & destroyed then, yes, the war failed.
If, on the other hand, you don't believe Bush and feel WMD's were a trumped up excuse to invade and oust Saddam then, no, it wasn't a failure but a verified success.

Well Saddam and most of his family is dead aren't they?

Onle less genocidist around, eh?

I dont think trading 5000 American lives for Sadamm and his two sons was worth that outcome

[turtlespeed 221]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So - the only active WMD agents they found in Iraq were made AFTER THE INVASION. Not only did the Iraq war utterly fail in its intent, it actually contributed to the development of chemical weapons by insurgents!

You just can't fail any more completely than that.

Whether the war failed in its intent depends on the observer. If you believe Bush and accept his reasoning that there were WMD's in Iraq and they must be found & destroyed then, yes, the war failed.
If, on the other hand, you don't believe Bush and feel WMD's were a trumped up excuse to invade and oust Saddam then, no, it wasn't a failure but a verified success.

Well Saddam and most of his family is dead aren't they?

Onle less genocidist around, eh?

I dont think trading 5000 American lives for Sadamm and his two sons was worth that outcome

That may be true. But it is not always about the American lives.
How much potential did he have to keep his genocide and murder strak going?
How many did he have the potential, and qualifications, AND will to murder?
We will never really know, but i know one thing. He'll kill no more.

Unless you are in favor of him still being alive and killing . . . in that case I can see your point.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Amazon 7]

There were plenty of other options to Sadaam and his thugs than to transport hunderds of thousands of Americans half way around the world to be THE WORLD POLICE.

He was contained... he was impotent... but he did have lots of oil.

If you did that role so much... by all means SIGN THE FUCK UP.

[juanesky 0]

Quote

>>Skeptics will note that these relatively small WMD stockpiles were hardly the
>>kind of grave danger that the Bush administration presented in the run-up
>>to the war.

>So it seems they did have them.

Nope, they didn't. To quote the article: "Remnants of Saddam’s toxic arsenal, largely destroyed after the Gulf War, remained."

They did indeed find destroyed shells with chemical weapon residue, and yellowcake (unpurified uranium) still under the seals that the UN put on the storage facility. Neither could be described as "WMD stockpiles" by any sane person.

What about the mustard gas? From the article:

"Jihadists, insurgents and foreign (possibly Iranian) agitators turned to these stockpiles during the Iraq conflict — and may have brewed up their own deadly agents... In August 2004, for instance, American forces surreptitiously purchased what they believed to be containers of liquid sulfur mustard, a toxic “blister agent” used as a chemical weapon since World War I. The troops tested the liquid, and “reported two positive results for blister.” "

So - the only active WMD agents they found in Iraq were made AFTER THE INVASION. Not only did the Iraq war utterly fail in its intent, it actually contributed to the development of chemical weapons by insurgents!

You just can't fail any more completely than that.

Really? We deposed a good hearted person from power, and you are complaining about it too?

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[turtlespeed 221]

Quote

There were plenty of other options to Sadaam and his thugs than to transport hunderds of thousands of Americans half way around the world to be THE WORLD POLICE.

He was contained... he was impotent... but he did have lots of oil.

If you did that role so much... by all means SIGN THE FUCK UP.

I did - I was there in '98

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[Guest]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

So - the only active WMD agents they found in Iraq were made AFTER THE INVASION. Not only did the Iraq war utterly fail in its intent, it actually contributed to the development of chemical weapons by insurgents!

You just can't fail any more completely than that.

Whether the war failed in its intent depends on the observer. If you believe Bush and accept his reasoning that there were WMD's in Iraq and they must be found & destroyed then, yes, the war failed.
If, on the other hand, you don't believe Bush and feel WMD's were a trumped up excuse to invade and oust Saddam then, no, it wasn't a failure but a verified success.

Well Saddam and most of his family is dead aren't they?

Onle less genocidist around, eh?

I dont think trading 5000 American lives for Sadamm and his two sons was worth that outcome

That may be true. But it is not always about the American lives.
How much potential did he have to keep his genocide and murder strak going?
How many did he have the potential, and qualifications, AND will to murder?
We will never really know, but i know one thing. He'll kill no more.

Unless you are in favor of him still being alive and killing . . . in that case I can see your point.

I liked what a LIBERAL said about Saddam (paraphrased as I cannot recall the exact quote or who said it, but I agree with the sentiment):

"What's NOT progressive about ridding the world of this thug?"

mh
.

"The mouse does not know life until it is in the mouth of the cat."

[turtlespeed 221]

Quote

I liked what a LIBERAL said about Saddam (paraphrased as I cannot recall the exact quote or who said it, but I agree with the sentiment):

"What's NOT progressive about ridding the world of this thug?"

mh
.

I guess in that regard, i am as progressive as progressives get.

I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama
BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun

[billvon 3,009]

>We deposed a good hearted person from power, and you are complaining
>about it too?

Nope.

[skipbelt 0]

his buddy tariq aziz got the death sentence , and a date with a rope !

[Andy9o8 2]

Quote

"What's NOT progressive about ridding the world of this thug?"

Yes, Hussein was a murdering thug; and yes, I'm glad he's gone. But it wasn't worth the thousands upon thousands of lives, not to mention the trillions of dollars and pounds. He didn't - especially after Gulf War 1 - present the threat to the region that, for example, Hitler presented to Europe or the Japanese militarists presented to Asia in the late 1930s. He was contained, and we could have kept him contained. GW Bush was a gullible, insecure simpleton, intellectually and emotionally way over his head in the presidency, who allowed a handful of chickenhawks persuade him that this was the way to show his father that he had a big enough pecker.