The Iraq / war on terror thread

[Mal Brossard]

You have already proved that you are unwilling to discuss this stuff.  You use guerilla warfare on these threads.  You post your BS, but then when I respond to it, you dont respond back.  So Im not going to waste my time with you anymore.  If you had anything enlightening to say, then you would respond to the criticisms of your posts.

He kinda reminds me of Walk in that sense.  Hey, speaking of which, where is Walk??  And what's this about being an alter-ego???

Have we uncovered a dual poster?  One who is just here to start shit in random political threads?

Pick one name and stick with it, chief.

[axls_locomotive]

Well many disagree with the reports and think that the weapons were taken out of the country.  Some of those include the President of Australia and Vlad Putin.  There were also many documents found that suggested that such weapons existed.

This is also untrue.  There have been proven links.  Even the 911 commission found some.  Besides he was one of the biggest contributors to the terrorist group Hetzbollah (excuse the spelling) which has killed the second most americans after Al Qaeda.

This is from the 911 commision

"There have been reports that contacts between Iraq and al-Qaeda also occurred after Bin Laden had returned to Afghanistan, but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship," the statement says.

"We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al-Qaeda co-operated on attacks against the United States."

feel free to provide links to the commissions findings

most of the americans (and other nationalities) that were killed by the hezbollah were killed during the israel, lebanese war...i dont believe they have actively targeted americans for years...theyre probably not too pleased with the iraq war though

Because as I addressed before the media made it look like Bush said that there was link between 911 and suddam, which is not what he said.  So Bush is restating what he did say, which was found true.

March 18, 2003

Dear Mr. Speaker: (Dear Mr. President:)

Consistent with section 3(b) of the Authorization for Use of Military Force Against Iraq Resolution of 2002 (Public Law 107-243), and based on information available to me, including that in the enclosed document, I determine that:

(1) reliance by the United States on further diplomatic and other peaceful means alone will neither (A) adequately protect the national security of the United States against the continuing threat posed by Iraq nor (B) likely lead to enforcement of all relevant United Nations Security Council resolutions regarding Iraq; and

(2) acting pursuant to the Constitution and Public Law 107-243 is consistent with the United States and other countries continuing to take the necessary actions against international terrorists and terrorist organizations, including those nations, organizations, or persons who planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001.

Sincerely,

GEORGE W. BUSH

"There's no question that Saddam Hussein had al Qaeda ties.? Bush 17/9/2003

?You can't distinguish between al-Qaeda and Saddam.? Bush 26/9/2002

?Iraq  the central front in the war on terror.? - Bush 23/9/2003

he hasnt exactly tried to disassociate between Iraq and Al Qaeda has he?

and his cronies, Dick and Colin have consistently commented on the links between Iraq and Al Qaeda...

[DRUNK]

We should have left Saddam in power, right? The Iraq war wasn't justified right? Nothing good is coming from the Iraq war, right? The Iraqi people are worse off with us there, right? Take a look at this site, and then tell me that.

http://members.cox.net/free_iraq/Free_Iraq.htm

[axls_locomotive]

daily bombings with people being killed every day, virtually no police force, Al Qaeda roaming freely thoughout the country, kidnappings of foreigners, increasing resentment of the USA and UK, looting, mass unemployment

and American troops indirectly killing women and children 2 days ago in a bombing raid does not exactly help the cause

[YouCouldBeMine]

I thought the name of the title was "Good Argument"?  

What a bunch of hogwash. Is that the best you can do is clip and paste crappy articles such as this?

I notice the author ignored the fact that Osama is nowhere to be seen and that Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11.

We didn't do shit back in the day (when we did business with him) about what ruthless dictator he was. Now we do and say "Hey look how bad he is".

Yea, we (the government) have known this man is a bastard for some time now.

The author also ignored the way we went into the "war". That has been discussed several times and of course violated international law.

But international law be damned! He might have some weapons over there! Who's with us?.........

Quit trying to be right. The hammer is falling on Bush and Blair.

It's over. We didn't produce anything but more trouble.

Hell, even Geraldo Rivera's episode where they uncovered Al Capone's vault turned up more shit than this!

You have already proved that you are unwilling to discuss this stuff.  You use guerilla warfare on these threads.  You post your BS, but then when I respond to it, you dont respond back.  So Im not going to waste my time with you anymore.  If you had anything enlightening to say, then you would respond to the criticisms of your posts.

I am not going to argue all day with you fools. You guys argue all day over dumb shit. You'll argue endlessly over the same thing over and over. Hell...you'd argue if the sky was blue if somebody brought it up.

I am not here to argue with you all day. I am here to present more of a truthful presence for people to choose from. I'm also here soley to annoy the shit out of you A**HOLES that have been calling us un-American for not supporting this war. I am giving you exactly what you have been giving this board for months and months. I am so sorry you don't like people with another viewpoint. I will not change your mind, and you will not change mine. But if I can change readers minds, and annoy you pro-war guys at the same time, then it's all good. But it is my duty as an American to speak my opinion. It's you guys who use the bully tactics. Now it's back in your lap and you dont' like it. Well....


Have a nice day.

Are you French?

How are we supposed to get anything done in this world with democrats? They're are tons of horrible countrys out there. And we can't really do much of anything. We have countrys like N. Korea that we cant do a damn thing to and Clintons best solution was to give them billions of dollars in aid to cease the nuclear production (that worked well).

Like it or not Iraq was a hotbed for terrorists. Even if Saddam didnt have direct connections with OBL it was only a matter of time untill he would (most certainly could) of been welcomed into the country with open arms.

Sure Clinton kept foriegn diplomatic relations a little bit better but look at how well he did with N. Korea and OBL. If you Clinton did his job right we'd have the towers standing and we wouldnt be where we are today with N Korea.

And also I dont see the arguement with the oil. Hypotheticaly - Iraq and Iran are in equal need of humanitarian help and harbor terrororists. Iran has 2 fields of hash and Iraq has several Oil fields. The Iraqi oil wasnt helping anyone but Saddam. Iraqis arent going to miss it none the less and they get a better country to boot.

[Miz]

And also I dont see the arguement with the oil. Hypotheticaly - Iraq and Iran are in equal need of humanitarian help and harbor terrororists. Iran has 2 fields of hash and Iraq has several Oil fields. The Iraqi oil wasnt helping anyone but Saddam. Iraqis arent going to miss it none the less and they get a better country to boot.

You don't see the argument?  You are stupider than I thought.

Bush isn't allowed to drill Alaska.  Oil is running out.  American's drive Humvees.  America needs Oil.  George Bush's campaign needs funds.  George Bush's Texan billionnaire friends want more Oil.

How can Iraqi's not miss billions of dollars worth of income?  Oh because they have a better country now that theres a mob rule.

[matt88]

I thought the name of the title was "Good Argument"?  

What a bunch of hogwash. Is that the best you can do is clip and paste crappy articles such as this?

I notice the author ignored the fact that Osama is nowhere to be seen and that Saddam had nothing to do with 9-11.

We didn't do shit back in the day (when we did business with him) about what ruthless dictator he was. Now we do and say "Hey look how bad he is".

Yea, we (the government) have known this man is a bastard for some time now.

The author also ignored the way we went into the "war". That has been discussed several times and of course violated international law.

But international law be damned! He might have some weapons over there! Who's with us?.........

Quit trying to be right. The hammer is falling on Bush and Blair.

It's over. We didn't produce anything but more trouble.

Hell, even Geraldo Rivera's episode where they uncovered Al Capone's vault turned up more shit than this!

You have already proved that you are unwilling to discuss this stuff.  You use guerilla warfare on these threads.  You post your BS, but then when I respond to it, you dont respond back.  So Im not going to waste my time with you anymore.  If you had anything enlightening to say, then you would respond to the criticisms of your posts.

I am not going to argue all day with you fools. You guys argue all day over dumb shit. You'll argue endlessly over the same thing over and over. Hell...you'd argue if the sky was blue if somebody brought it up.

I am not here to argue with you all day. I am here to present more of a truthful presence for people to choose from. I'm also here soley to annoy the shit out of you A**HOLES that have been calling us un-American for not supporting this war. I am giving you exactly what you have been giving this board for months and months. I am so sorry you don't like people with another viewpoint. I will not change your mind, and you will not change mine. But if I can change readers minds, and annoy you pro-war guys at the same time, then it's all good. But it is my duty as an American to speak my opinion. It's you guys who use the bully tactics. Now it's back in your lap and you dont' like it. Well....


Have a nice day.

Are you French?

How are we supposed to get anything done in this world with democrats? They're are tons of horrible countrys out there. And we can't really do much of anything. We have countrys like N. Korea that we cant do a damn thing to and Clintons best solution was to give them billions of dollars in aid to cease the nuclear production (that worked well).

Like it or not Iraq was a hotbed for terrorists. Even if Saddam didnt have direct connections with OBL it was only a matter of time untill he would (most certainly could) of been welcomed into the country with open arms.

Sure Clinton kept foriegn diplomatic relations a little bit better but look at how well he did with N. Korea and OBL. If you Clinton did his job right we'd have the towers standing and we wouldnt be where we are today with N Korea.

And also I dont see the arguement with the oil. Hypotheticaly - Iraq and Iran are in equal need of humanitarian help and harbor terrororists. Iran has 2 fields of hash and Iraq has several Oil fields. The Iraqi oil wasnt helping anyone but Saddam. Iraqis arent going to miss it none the less and they get a better country to boot.

Well fucking said YouCouldBeMine

[SLCPUNK]

Some great points!!! Glad somebody has some balls to admit being wrong.


Bereuter: War in Iraq not justified
BY DON WALTON
Lincoln Nebraska Journal Star

In a dramatic departure from the Bush administration, Republican Rep. Doug Bereuter says he now believes the U.S. military assault on Iraq was unjustified.


"I've reached the conclusion, retrospectively, now that the inadequate intelligence and faulty conclusions are being revealed, that all things being considered, it was a mistake to launch that military action," Bereuter wrote in a letter to constituents in the final days of his congressional career.

That's especially true in view of the fact that the attack was initiated "without a broad and engaged international coalition," the 1st District congressman said.

"Knowing now what I know about the reliance on the tenuous or insufficiently corroborated intelligence used to conclude that Saddam maintained a substantial WMD (weapons of mass destruction) arsenal, I believe that launching the pre-emptive military action was not justified."

As a result of the war, he said, "our country's reputation around the world has never been lower and our alliances are weakened."

Bereuter is a senior member of the House International Relations Committee and vice chairman of the House Intelligence Committee.

His four-page letter represented a departure from his support for a 2002 House resolution authorizing the president to go to war.

His vote to authorize the use of military force - even pre-emptive force - was based on faulty, or misrepresented, intelligence that led to the fear Saddam Hussein would share weapons of mass destruction with terrorists, Bereuter said.

"Left unresolved for now is whether intelligence was intentionally misconstrued to justify military action," he said.

In a floor statement accompanying his 2002 vote, Bereuter urged that the international coalition be broadened and the administration adequately plan for the consequences of war and not divert resources from the battle against al-Qaida and the stabilization of Afghanistan.

Despite acknowledged intelligence failures and failure to locate weapons of mass destruction, President Bush continues to forcefully argue the war was justified because Saddam represented a threat to the United States, his neighbors and the people of Iraq.

While criticizing the manner in which the administration went to war, Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry has said he still would have voted for the authorizing resolution knowing what he knows today.

Bereuter pointed to a list of negative consequences arising from the war.

"The cost in casualties is already large and growing," he said, "and the immediate and long-term financial costs are incredible.

"From the beginning of the conflict, it was doubtful that we for long would be seen as liberators, but instead increasingly as an occupying force.

"Now we are immersed in a dangerous, costly mess, and there is no easy and quick way to end our responsibilities in Iraq without creating bigger future problems in the region and, in general, in the Muslim world."

Bereuter sent the letter to constituents who have contacted him about the war.

"I felt I should send you a forthright update of my views and conclusions on that subject before I leave office," he said.

Bereuter will depart the House after 26 years to become president of the Asia Foundation on Sept. 1.

Congress and the administration "must learn from the errors and failures" related to the attack and its aftermath, he said.

"The toll in American military casualties and those of civilians, physical damages caused, financial resources spent, and the damage to the support and image of America abroad all demand such an assessment and accounting."

In addition to "a massive failure or misinterpretation of intelligence" concerning weapons of mass destruction, Bereuter said, the Bush administration made a number of errors in prosecuting the war despite warnings about the consequences.

"American and coalition forces were inadequate in number to take effective control of Iraq when the initial military action was completed," he said.

Other mistakes included disbanding the Iraqi army and placing responsibility for reconstruction with the Department of Defense instead of the Department of State, he said.

[MCT]

<yawn>

[SLCPUNK]

Ah yes...who could forget you.

There are plenty of people (judging the size and post count on the political threads of past) that are interested in an adult conversation. In the time preceding the election I think it is important to talk about issues. Again, so do many others, no matter what their political stance.

If this is boring to you,? I suggest you look elsewhere or maybe troll your local Jr. High where the discussion may be at a level that is more interesting to you.

All other comments from both sides I'd love to hear. (Night train get your ass over here!  )

Regards,

Jason.

[Doc Emmett Brown]

Bereuter will depart the House after 26 years to become president of the Asia Foundation on Sept. 1.

Bereuter is putting his fingers in an interesting pie.  The Asia Foundation http://www.asiafoundation.org/About/overview.html proposes to establish some major policies for US-Asia relations:

"In January 2004, The Asia Foundation announced the launch of its "America's Role in Asia" project, a comprehensive assessment of U.S.-Asia relations. During a series of workshops in the first nine months of 2004, leading American and Asian policymakers and scholars will analyze the security, political, economic and social challenges facing the U.S. in Asia and recommend policy initiatives to the U.S. administration and Congress. The project will culminate with the release of separate American and Asian reports prior to the U.S. elections in the fall of 2004."

It is working to help Aghfanistan get back on track.  Hopefully they can do something about the flourishing opium trade that exists there now.

All other comments from both sides I'd love to hear. (Night train get your ass over here!  )

You and Nightrain are like Booker & younggunner - a pair of lovebirds.   

[GnRNightrain]

I dont necessarily disagree with his analysis.  I think that in hindsight this is a legitimate view to have.  However, I disagree with those that say that Bush deliberately disregarded the intelligence, or that there wasnt ample evidence to believe that he had such weapons.  I still stand by the fact that I think he made the right decision with the information that he has had from sources that I have read.  The fact that many other people made the same conclusions he did (outside the CIA and US, and within).  I think our President couldnt allow Suddam to have such weapons if he had them.  I think the evidence showed he had them, therefore Bush made the right decison.

However, in hindsight I think I would probably be against the war as well.  However, I think that there have been many good things to say about the war even though no WMDs have been found.  No more suddam, and I think that we have focused the anti-american muslim extremists against our troops instead of alligning to fight us here.  I think that there somehow has to be a change of mindset in the middle east.  We cant let these extremists take root in these countries.  We have disregarded them for the past 30 years, and cant do it anymore.  Some think that Iraq was the right place to place our foot in the middle east to get changes, and possibly democracy.  Others believe, that Iraq creates more anti-americanism in the middle east and that the best way is to just stay out of all mideastern affairs.  Im not sure either approach is fully the correct approach to take.

[jarmo]

I think our President couldnt allow Suddam to have such weapons if he had them.? I think the evidence showed he had them, therefore Bush made the right decison.

I think your president should've concentrated on getting the guy responsible for 9/11 first and then going after the others.

It wasn't Saddam or his hidden weapons that killed all those innocent people in September 2001.




/jarmo

[pilferk]

I think our President couldnt allow Suddam to have such weapons if he had them.? I think the evidence showed he had them, therefore Bush made the right decison.

I think your president should've concentrated on getting the guy responsible for 9/11 first and then going after the others.

It wasn't Saddam or his hidden weapons that killed all those innocent people in September 2001.




/jarmo

Ding ding ding ding ding ding ding!!! We have a winner!

I feel exactly the same way.? Had the Prez concentrated on the "real" enemy, instead of the ultimate Straw Man in Saddam, not only would our country be better off, but I'd bet dollars to donuts that there wouldn't be 1/2 the ill will there is toward the US in the world.? That's ignoring the fact that he'd probably win the reellection in a landslide.

[elikovich]

I still stand by the fact that I think he made the right decision with the information that he has had from sources that I have read.? The fact that many other people made the same conclusions he did (outside the CIA and US, and within).?

from talking to intelligence people, i've heard a different side of the story...that cheney and rumsfeld went to the intelligence community and asked what the link was between al qaeda and saddam...when intel said they weren't sure it existed, they were told to "find a link"...bottom line is from what i've heard, we were looking for any way possible to implicate saddam, even if it meant bending (or breaking) the truth

i realize this is not the best evidence, but i figured i'd bring it up, since the sources are reputable

ed

[Doc Emmett Brown]

Some think that Iraq was the right place to place our foot in the middle east to get changes, and possibly democracy.? Others believe, that Iraq creates more anti-americanism in the middle east and that the best way is to just stay out of all mideastern affairs.? Im not sure either approach is fully the correct approach to take.

damn. You said something we can agree on.  Being the leader of the free world, it is necessary that we place our pawns in the right countries.  Installing pro-American governments is one method of aligning our pieces.  Working to bring democracy to countries ruled by tyranny benefits everyone involved.

But it also stirs up a hornet's nest because we look like meddlers.  The stereotypical arrogant American bully of the playground.   So the middle ground involves sound intelligence, tactful diplomacy and none of this childish 'Bring It On' mentality that makes Bush look silly.

Even if the Iraq intelligence seemed plausible in the beginning, many people were justifiably confused why we began a new mission even though we failed to capture Bin Laden and let the warlords of Afghanistan escape.   

It begs the question: are we allowing Osama to remain at large so we can raise terror alerts periodically and keep the nation in a perpetual state of fear?   I dont care if it sounds like a conspiracy theory, because IMHO it's a valid question.

[MCT]

There are plenty of people (judging the size and post count on the political threads of past) that are interested in an adult conversation. In the time preceding the election I think it is important to talk about issues. Again, so do many others, no matter what their political stance.

If this is boring to you,  I suggest you look elsewhere or maybe troll your local Jr. High where the discussion may be at a level that is more interesting to you.

Looking down on me in an arena in which you are at best a dilettante, doesn't get you very far Jason.

Furthermore, to demographically equate me with the very throng that seems to adore you, does even less for your cause as I'm neither on my knees in adoration nor of that particular demographic.

An ageist faux pas; and accompanied by a rather conspicuous contradiction no less! Brilliant Jason, just brilliant...

As for my '<yawn>', please take note of the fact that it wasn't an attack, or anything of the sort towards you. In fact it was directed towards the rather drab political discussions that have been pervading the Jungle as of late. Incidentally, you happened to be the author of the first political thread that I happened upon today.

In all fairness, I suppose I should at least concede that you have a point in saying - 'If this is boring to you,  I suggest you look elsewhere or maybe troll your local Jr. High where the discussion may be at a level that is more interesting to you.' - for it IS actually boring me, and I admittedly have nothing of value to offer because of that. Of course you went overboard with throwing in those glib remarks without the slightest provocation from me. Which as you may or may not know is quite needless, to say the least. So in the future, let's endeavor keep it toned down a notch shall we?

(Obligatory dots) - ................................................................................................... .............

PS - Thanks for the PM! You're a real sweetheart.................

[K-Rock]

It is working to help Aghfanistan get back on track.? Hopefully they can do something about the flourishing opium trade that exists there now.

Afghanistan is back on track because of opium.  Their recovery began with harvesting heroin fields.  Can anybody read bewteen the lines?

[gnrvrrule]

This guy has his own opinions and that's fine.  I don't mind him speaking his mind on that issue.  Right now, at this very moment, the situation in Iraq does not look great, simply because we have lost 950 soldiers and the democracy has only just begun.  But, I believe that al Sadr is close to going down, and that will make a huge difference.  And like Nightrain said, the information Bush was presented with in 2003 made it close to a no-brainer for him to declare war.  I still believe that by getting Saddam and by installing democracy in the future in Iraq was the right thing to do.  You can disagree if you want, and that's fine.

[SLCPUNK]

There are plenty of people (judging the size and post count on the political threads of past) that are interested in an adult conversation. In the time preceding the election I think it is important to talk about issues. Again, so do many others, no matter what their political stance.

If this is boring to you,? I suggest you look elsewhere or maybe troll your local Jr. High where the discussion may be at a level that is more interesting to you.

In fact it was directed towards the rather drab political discussions that have been pervading the Jungle as of late.

haha, like this one:

http://www.heretodaygonetohell.com/board/index.php?topic=12569.0

Well like any other topic, if you are not interested, there really is no need in posting. Thanks for sharing though. I like the big words you use, you really impress me. LOL, you are so insecure.

*************


I think it took guts for this man to say what he did. He felt that there was a mistake made and that it should be looked closely.

I wish more people would think like this. Part of human nature (in a mature adult) is to lay the ego aside and reflect on what you did. Ask yourself if what you did was the right choice, or a mistake. As a leader, this is more important than anything. What I see with this President is a man unwilling to really look at what is going on and ask himself that question.