Report to show Saddam transferred WMDs to Syria

[AlteredDNA]

[
Didn't George proclaim "Mission Accomplished" 4 years ago? Hmm.

Wow, what an articulated message/rebuttal.

What I said isn't true Liz? Did our president not proclaim "Mission Accomplished" on the aircraft carrier 4 years ago?

I am waiting with baited breath on your answer.

Acrtually, Bush initially denied being responsible for the "Mission Accomplished" banner, blaming the ship's crew instead. The White House would later concede that it was their handiwork. Par for the course, as bragadocious bullshit is usually this administration's giveaway tell.

So Bush blamed the crew???? Jeez, more great stuff from this guy. He will be remembered in history as the biggest LOSER of a president America ever had. He makes Nixon look like a saint.

He didn't blame the crew...those are TNC's words...

Semantics... sorry, but it boils down to the sign was used by the administration to proclaim Mission Accomplished, was it not? It was. We've constantly heard the WMD stuff (that was proven to be wrong), we've heard that Saddam was connected to Al Queda (which was proven wrong). Basically, W went in to finish what his dad didn't finish. Not to mention how Haliburton's going in and making huge bucks...

Come on, you guys can't seriously support this...

Actually, words are very important...don't rationalize it away with "semantics", especially if you're throwing the "WMD stuff" in.

Read this whole thread, and the links provided, and you'll have a better understanding of who and what the sign was created for...

[brywool]

[
Didn't George proclaim "Mission Accomplished" 4 years ago? Hmm.

Wow, what an articulated message/rebuttal.

What I said isn't true Liz? Did our president not proclaim "Mission Accomplished" on the aircraft carrier 4 years ago?

I am waiting with baited breath on your answer.

Acrtually, Bush initially denied being responsible for the "Mission Accomplished" banner, blaming the ship's crew instead. The White House would later concede that it was their handiwork. Par for the course, as bragadocious bullshit is usually this administration's giveaway tell.

So Bush blamed the crew???? Jeez, more great stuff from this guy. He will be remembered in history as the biggest LOSER of a president America ever had. He makes Nixon look like a saint.

He didn't blame the crew...those are TNC's words...

Semantics... sorry, but it boils down to the sign was used by the administration to proclaim Mission Accomplished, was it not? It was. We've constantly heard the WMD stuff (that was proven to be wrong), we've heard that Saddam was connected to Al Queda (which was proven wrong). Basically, W went in to finish what his dad didn't finish. Not to mention how Haliburton's going in and making huge bucks...

Come on, you guys can't seriously support this...

Actually, words are very important...don't rationalize it away with "semantics", especially if you're throwing the "WMD stuff" in.

Read this whole thread, and the links provided, and you'll have a better understanding of who and what the sign was created for...

I did read who the sign was created for. I understand it. Then it was used for PR for that which it wasn't intended that "the Mission" was accomplished ("The Iraq Mission" , not the crew's mission). The crew's mission was accomplished. That makes perfect sense. But you can't deny that it was used as white house PR to say that THE mission was complete.

Look at THIS Clip (http://youtube.com/watch?v=CFijzDyJnVE in which Bush says "Major combat in Iraq has ended and in the Battle of Iraq, the US and its Allies have prevailed".

Now TELL me that he wasn't full of shit and that whole thing wasn't used as PR to make it sound like the US won. A bit early to proclaim victory, dontcha think W? Especially when McCain says we could be there for 100 years.... We won't solve this here. I don't believe our administration was doing this for the right reasons and I don't think we should be there now. A huge percentage of folks DON'T think we should be there. Bush and his administration are an embarrassment to America. That's my opinion. Sue me.

[tj]

History will show that though difficult and mistakes were made, this was in the long run the right thing to do. The blame America first crowd will also be shown as the political cowards they are.

No they won't. Haven't you heard? History books are written by liberals.

By the way, 99% of your post is garbage.

Glad you see it that way, it confirms my suspisions.

[tj]

Semantics... sorry, but it boils down to the sign was used by the administration to proclaim Mission Accomplished, was it not? It was. We've constantly heard the WMD stuff (that was proven to be wrong), we've heard that Saddam was connected to Al Queda (which was proven wrong). Basically, W went in to finish what his dad didn't finish. Not to mention how Haliburton's going in and making huge bucks...

Come on, you guys can't seriously support this...[/quote]

Just because they have not been found, does not mean that they did not or do not still exist. THey just haven't found any. The Iraqis claimed for years that there were no mass graves. We said there were, even had pictures. Just because we had not found them when Sadaam was saying that they didn't have them did not mean that they did not exist.

[Saint John]

Semantics... sorry, but it boils down to the sign was used by the administration to proclaim Mission Accomplished, was it not? It was. We've constantly heard the WMD stuff (that was proven to be wrong), we've heard that Saddam was connected to Al Queda (which was proven wrong). Basically, W went in to finish what his dad didn't finish. Not to mention how Haliburton's going in and making huge bucks...

Come on, you guys can't seriously support this...

Just because they have not been found, does not mean that they did not or do not still exist. THey just haven't found any. The Iraqis claimed for years that there were no mass graves. We said there were, even had pictures. Just because we had not found them when Sadaam was saying that they didn't have them did not mean that they did not exist.[/quote]

Bingo.

[brywool]

Just because they have not been found, does not mean that they did not or do not still exist. THey just haven't found any. The Iraqis claimed for years that there were no mass graves. We said there were, even had pictures. Just because we had not found them when Sadaam was saying that they didn't have them did not mean that they did not exist.

Sorry, but you don't go to war until there's documented proof of a threat to US and there wasn't. Even our own inspectors said there was nothing there. Granted, Hussein wouldn't let inspectors in, okay, so you blockade them, not bomb them.
We might as well go after China and Korea now as well. They actually HAVE WMDs. But we don't. We went to clean up what daddy left behind. What Saddam was doing to his people was wrong. I've got no quarrel with that. So say THAT'S why we're going in and don't give me this CONSTANT TERRORISM RHETORIC about how "Iraq's a danger to America" BULLSH*T. Then we use this same logic to screw with people's civil liberties and keep Americans living in fear. More like fear of our own government...

And during all this garbage, where the hell is Osama Bin Laden?? "Oh gee, we lost him".
And why did it take SO long to help people in New Orleans? "Oh, golly, all our military was fighting against terrorist in Iraq and looking for NUKULAR weapons..."

Whatever... Hope you guys are happy that this is just gonna go on and on and on... I am not.

[Saint John]

The people in New Orleans received plenty of help. Had they concentrated on getting the fuck out rather than looting and being opportunists they would have been much better off. Then, when put up in the Superdome, they decided to rape and rob one another.

[AlteredDNA]

Just because they have not been found, does not mean that they did not or do not still exist. THey just haven't found any. The Iraqis claimed for years that there were no mass graves. We said there were, even had pictures. Just because we had not found them when Sadaam was saying that they didn't have them did not mean that they did not exist.

Sorry, but you don't go to war until there's documented proof of a threat to US and there wasn't. Even our own inspectors said there was nothing there. Granted, Hussein wouldn't let inspectors in, okay, so you blockade them, not bomb them.
We might as well go after China and Korea now as well. They actually HAVE WMDs. But we don't. We went to clean up what daddy left behind. What Saddam was doing to his people was wrong. I've got no quarrel with that. So say THAT'S why we're going in and don't give me this CONSTANT TERRORISM RHETORIC about how "Iraq's a danger to America" BULLSH*T. Then we use this same logic to screw with people's civil liberties and keep Americans living in fear. More like fear of our own government...

And during all this garbage, where the hell is Osama Bin Laden?? "Oh gee, we lost him".
And why did it take SO long to help people in New Orleans? "Oh, golly, all our military was fighting against terrorist in Iraq and looking for NUKULAR weapons..."

Whatever... Hope you guys are happy that this is just gonna go on and on and on... I am not.

The authorization for military action against Iraq for not cooperating with the UN weapons inspectors was there before 9/11...It didn't happen overnight...

You also couldn't be more wrong about New Orleans / Katrina...There is blame to go around, but I would definitely put the Feds way at the end of that list...

[brywool]

The people in New Orleans received plenty of help. Had they concentrated on getting the fuck out rather than looting and being opportunists they would have been much better off. Then, when put up in the Superdome, they decided to rape and rob one another.

You don't SERIOUSLY believe that SJ, do ya? Come on man...

Check this out: http://youtube.com/watch?v=_4oEX_bL158&feature=related

There are 3 parts to it. VERY interesting...

Interesting how news copters got there right away, but it took military helicopters forever...

[AlienC]

Since this board is so full of ... ah... global political expertise...could someone explain to me why they did bring our country into a war?

You really think they fabricated reports and searched for bogus reports just to bring us into war? You really think they sacrificed thousands of our finest young men and women for corporate profits? You really think they brought us into to Iraq, knowing they'd blow the shit out of it so Haliburton could come and and profit from rebuilding it? The place had horrible infrastructure anyway...so Haliburton could have done that even without the place getting blown to smithereens. Oh, was it so the oil tycoons could profit?

Next you'll say the price of oil is because of the war. What the hell would have happened if terrorist nations took control of the mideast and its oil?

Let's see...first they fabricated things, then they sought out as much BS as possible, then presented it to Congress as to hoodwink them into giving bipartisan support for the war. If they are as stupid as you all say, how could they have figured out to pull that off?

I don't like the fact we had to go to war any more than anyone else, but this BS that continues to be spouted makes me nauseous.

Everyone forgets that the military was stationed all around Iraq during Pres. Goodhead's terms. They were not in Kuwait and other positions on vacation. There was word this was about to happen long before Bush 2 came into office.

Did everyone forget the atrocities Suddam inflicted on his own people? Don't think he was capable of having WMDs? Oh ya, he dismantled and distroyed them and promised never to develop them again...sure...even though he actually had them and was not afraid to use them...since he did.

Did everyone forget he actually did invade Kuwait. Why did he do that? To create stability in the Mideast?

The current administration may have screwed things up during the war, but the BS being spewed as to why they went to war is just that BS.

Everyone's entitled to their opinions. That's what's great about our company. It's when folks deride, smear and accuse...without having a clue what the hell they are talking about that makes things go south.

I don't have the answers. If you're all so smart and informed...show me the facts. If not, shut the f up. Don't recreate history or spout the old rhetoric to prove your points. That may sound good, but means nothin.

Back to the game.

Of what?


Apply, then rinse and repeat.
Blow dry.






Like the Budget Surplus of 2000, our Global Goodwill has been squandered on adventure in Iraq, while we've allowed the real enemy to grow in the Afghan - Paki frontier.
The guys in power now learned at the feet of the ones who brought us The Gulf of Tonkin incident.
A completely fabricated incident designed to play the public into a war pitch. Which it did, Anyone say "Viet Nam" lately? NO? Then you haven't paid attention, either growing up, or in class.

Once you know about Hegel and his Dialectic as the current purveyors of it inflict upon us, a lot of things start to fall into place. Explained simply, it's the sophistic foundation for a self fulfilling prophesy.

In the wake of the Neo-CONs lack of an Iraqi "Marshall Plan" (any plan? ) , and the elemental failure to consider historical cultural alliances of Christian and Kurd, basic Muslim differences of Shia and Sunni, The historical differneces between Turk and Kurd and an utterly insane dream that we would be welcomed for any longer than it took to get rid of Saddam one is left with the nagging question, Either they planned poorly, if at all, or their stubborn arrogance caused them to ignore over 2000 years of strife in that area. Either way, it's Epic Fail. It's best characterized by picturing US Special Forces watching priceless artifacts being looted from the Iraqi National Museum, and being UNDER ORDERS to NOT intervene. We're supposed to be representing something better than rule under an iron hand and yet we allow the wholesale looting of your national identity. The symbolism is rich.

[brywool]

The guys in power now learned at the feet of the ones who brought us The Gulf of Tonkin incident.

I'd never heard of this part of history before. Very interesting to say the least.

[AlienC]

Hey Monker...I can't figure out how to do all the quotes on these responses, so I'll just say...not sure how, but I agree with you on many of your points. Well spoken and accurate. Maybe a little different context as to what I was trying to say on a couple, but good points. Some points are still up for debate though.

I keep asking the question...why would they do what they did? I think they screwed up, but not for their own personal gain. Again, I could be wrong.

No problem with good debate.

I guess I'd better go study up and find my own answers to this mess since I shouldn't find it here. Between 60 Minutes and the internet, I'm sure I'll find the real truth.

KU is losing it. Shit.

You're kidding right?

<needs meter calibration.

[AlienC]

On 9/11, while Charlie Daniels was singing about freedom on Fox News, Cheney and Bush were already talking about IRAQ.

Oh by the way, ever notice how on most topics involving issues affecting working people, Bush stammers and stumbles on his words. When it's WAR, he speaks totally clear and on point. Check it out sometime.

Thank you! I've been saying this for years.
Story I heard from an Official Good Ol' Boy down South.... After losing one of his first races, his pollsters came back with the problem was people perceived him as being "too smart". His strategist said that would never happen again. His stragetist was Karl Rove. GW's never played as "smart" since then. He's also never lost.




I guess that means he's a Method guy......

[Behshad]

do I have to chill you all down again!???

[squirt1]

Our media has certainly have done a great job of turning half the coutry against each other and reporting according to their political beliefs. Walter Cronkite did it pretty well back in the 60-70's but Dan Rather got himself put on the fast track to retirement. Catie honey you are a perveyor of slanted news as your rating must suggest. Get your news from mulitiple sources i.e. radio, tv , newspapers magazines and then believe half !

[conversationpc]

Oh by the way, ever notice how on most topics involving issues affecting working people, Bush stammers and stumbles on his words. When it's WAR, he speaks totally clear and on point. Check it out sometime.

Thank you! I've been saying this for years.

I'm no big fan of Bush but this is a load of crap. It would be easy for me to pick out a politician on the other side of the political spectrum from me and speculate how they sound totally clear on particular issues and like stammering idiots on others. Perspective plays a big role and I'm certain that's a lot of what's going on with statements like this.

Take the Presidential debates in 2004 for instance. The first one was a completely terrible performance by Bush and he stammered through much of that debate regardless of the topic. The next debate where they were free to walk about the stage and take questions from the audience, he appeared much more at ease and didn't stutter or stammer hardly at all.

[The_Noble_Cause]

I'm no big fan of Bush but this is a load of crap. It would be easy for me to pick out a politician on the other side of the political spectrum from me and speculate how they sound totally clear on particular issues and like stammering idiots on others. Perspective plays a big role and I'm certain that's a lot of what's going on with statements like this.

Take the Presidential debates in 2004 for instance. The first one was a completely terrible performance by Bush and he stammered through much of that debate regardless of the topic. The next debate where they were free to walk about the stage and take questions from the audience, he appeared much more at ease and didn't stutter or stammer hardly at all.

People seem to forget when Bush ran against Gore in 2000 he was a fairly decent speaker.
Dare I say even eloquent?
I really think his years of hard partying are finally catching up to him.

[The_Noble_Cause]

He didn't blame the crew...those are TNC's words...

So terribly sorry. Bush held the crew "accountable". There. Is that better?

This entire thread is a pox on the ass of humanity.

[Rick]

This entire thread is a pox on the ass of humanity.

[The_Noble_Cause]

The only problem we have in this war is the media and the anti-war moonbat leftists.

It was the "liberal media" that allowed this war to happen in the first place.
Just one example out of incalcuable scores, does the NY Times' Judith Miller ring any bells?

[AlteredDNA]

He didn't blame the crew...those are TNC's words...

So terribly sorry. Bush held the crew "accountable". There. Is that better?

This entire thread is a pox on the ass of humanity.

I could less what word(s) you look up and use...My objection was with brywool using your words as if they were facts...

[Arkansas]

How many lies did LBJ tell back in the early 60s so he could escalate our VietNam tragedy? ...and just to benefit his corporate relations? And some 58000 plus died, many of whom are still unaccounted/unknown? Please, someone explain our past leaders' actions before condemning our current. Bush today or his Dad, we may not be there at all, if Saddam Hussein had not invaded Kuwait or deceived the UN.

There's no way ANYONE can point a finger at America, saying that we go pick fights, if not for international tyrants. When was the last time we invaded a peaceful, global contributing country? It's the oppressive bad guys that cause all this. We defended Kuwait, and then we defended the world because Saddam Hussein was killing tens of thousands of different ethnic Iraqis in the name of oppressive control, and systematic deception with false/true lies about WMDs.

No one ever dies for no reason, unless it's cold-blooded law-breaking. The personnel of our armed forces signed a contract with full knowledge that their lives are at risk. For 'us' to sit back and armchair quarterback this whole thing is absurd.

Aggression is a fact of nature...insects, fish, animals, or humans...survival of the fittest. Politics, finances, or war, it makes no difference. The rule is, people die...careers, bank accts, or lives . The next rule is that you can't change the first rule. (Kinda borrowed from the MASH character, Col. Henry Blake.)

Btw, how many millions die every day due to corporate negligence and/or pharmaceutical lies? How many syndromes & diseases go 'uncurable' just so that corporations can continue to make billions from useless drugs? How many lives are lost every day while we stomach the legal wranglings, rather than demand cures...cures that probably exist, but are being supressed so that big business can continue to cash-in?

Yes, war is difficult, but I think it's a necessary evil. What's more frightening is that many more lives, exponentially, are lost every single day than the 4000 in Iraq, due to people like me and you that continue to let big business reign-free right here within our borders. We pay drug companies and insurance companies to do this every single day...yet we think that discontinuing a necessary military action is more important.

I'm just a baffled, conservative nobody. Maybe some day I'll be as smart as everyone else.


later~

[The_Noble_Cause]

How many lies did LBJ tell back in the early 60s so he could escalate our VietNam tragedy? ...and just to benefit his corporate relations? And some 58000 plus died, many of whom are still unaccounted/unknown? Please, someone explain our past leaders' actions before condemning our current. Bush today or his Dad, we may not be there at all, if Saddam Hussein had not invaded Kuwait or deceived the UN.

There's no way ANYONE can point a finger at America, saying that we go pick fights, if not for international tyrants. When was the last time we invaded a peaceful, global contributing country? It's the oppressive bad guys that cause all this. We defended Kuwait, and then we defended the world because Saddam Hussein was killing tens of thousands of different ethnic Iraqis in the name of oppressive control, and systematic deception with false/true lies about WMDs.

No one ever dies for no reason, unless it's cold-blooded law-breaking. The personnel of our armed forces signed a contract with full knowledge that their lives are at risk. For 'us' to sit back and armchair quarterback this whole thing is absurd.

Aggression is a fact of nature...insects, fish, animals, or humans...survival of the fittest. Politics, finances, or war, it makes no difference. The rule is, people die...careers, bank accts, or lives . The next rule is that you can't change the first rule. (Kinda borrowed from the MASH character, Col. Henry Blake.)

Btw, how many millions die every day due to corporate negligence and/or pharmaceutical lies? How many syndromes & diseases go 'uncurable' just so that corporations can continue to make billions from useless drugs? How many lives are lost every day while we stomach the legal wranglings, rather than demand cures...cures that probably exist, but are being supressed so that big business can continue to cash-in?

Yes, war is difficult, but I think it's a necessary evil. What's more frightening is that many more lives, exponentially, are lost every single day than the 4000 in Iraq, due to people like me and you that continue to let big business reign-free right here within our borders. We pay drug companies and insurance companies to do this every single day...yet we think that discontinuing a necessary military action is more important.

I'm just a baffled, conservative nobody. Maybe some day I'll be as smart as everyone else.


later~

There's nothing inevitable about a preemptive war of choice.
The operative words being, of course, preemptive and choice.
As for LBJ - spare me.
If it's not Clinton, it's always someone else.

[The_Noble_Cause]

The Iraq Liberation Act of 1998 (Public Law 105-338) [1] (codified in a note to 22 USCS § 2151) is a United States Congressional statement of policy calling for regime change in Iraq.

The Act was passed 360-38 in the U.S. House of Representatives[2] and by unanimous consent in the Senate.[3] US President Bill Clinton signed the bill into law on October 31, 1998.

Bill Clinton is about as much of a Democrat as Joe Leiberman.

It's widely known that the PNAC Neocons that were encouraging Bill on about "regime change" would later go on to fill top key positions in the Bush administration.
The end result speaks for itself.

[The_Noble_Cause]

Dude, it was a done deal. We, America, had decided that Saddam had to go. Period end of story. Matter of time. 9/11 made it happen for real. It's never fun but has to be done.

This tossing around of words like "inevitability" and "fact of nature" might temporarily balm a guilty concious, but it does little to alter the fact that American policy is dictated by the leaders put in office. Invading Iraq was only a foregone conclusion to the megalomaniacs that wished it into being. You also gloss over the fact that regime change can be brought about in different ways besides war.

Would President Gore have invaded Iraq? I have friends who think otherwise, but I doubt it.

[Rick]

the fact that American policy is dictated by the leaders put in office

By American Voters.

Or a few hanging chads.

I'll stay out of it.

[The_Noble_Cause]

the fact that American policy is dictated by the leaders put in office

By American Voters.

I thought that was a given, but now that you mention it, technically, Bush was appointed by the Supreme Court.

[Rockindeano]

the fact that American policy is dictated by the leaders put in office

By American Voters.

Actually you're wrong. The president and vice president are elected by state electors. I do agree with TNC, that Bush was appointed, err, given the office by Sandra Day O'Connor. She was overheard on election night in an expensive Italian restaurant in DC, that when the networks gave Florida to Gore, she muttered, "great, now I have to stay on four more years." Hmm.

[AlteredDNA]

the fact that American policy is dictated by the leaders put in office

By American Voters.

I thought that was a given, but now that you mention it, technically, Bush was appointed by the Supreme Court.

Technically, the Supreme Court reversed a faulty Florida Supreme Court ruling ordering a third count that would have violated the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, since different counting standards were being applied. Therefore, Bush was elected based on the original recount.

Technically...

[StevePerryHair]

the fact that American policy is dictated by the leaders put in office

By American Voters.

Or a few hanging chads.

I'll stay out of it.

Sure, bring up Florida AGAIN