Beware, political discussion may ensue

sleeper

sleeper

Former LOD President
So, does anyone have any idea how we went from "we're still looking for WMD's" to "The president knew Iraq didn't have any WMD's and deliberately decieved the country to start a war." I think i missed something over the last couple of weeks.

The last time i checked, they had found a few things (factories and trucks just like the ones Colin Powell described to the UN), and were looking for more. Now i'm hearing about how the Bush administration manipulated intelligence and deliberately decieved the country to get us into a fight.

Did i miss something, or is this just a brilliant new tactic (making preposterous accusations) to call Bush's credibility into question?
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

they didn't find any factories (i think, at least haven't heard anything about it)... they did find a couple of trucks and 3000 chemical protection suits.
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

Dave, I'm with you on this. What happened to get to this point? We have soldiers dying there and we're whining about who said what, when and why?

If these people saying "The president knew Iraq didn't have any WMD's and deliberately decieved the country to start a war" would think about it, there's some interesting contradictory questions here. Was former President Clinton deceiving the Nation when he sent cruise missiles into Iraq to destroy such weapons and facilities? Do we believe the UN was deceiving the world when it had inspectors looking for these weapons? Were the citizens of Iran and Iraq deceived when thousands were killed with such weapons? Were the intelligence organizations, Congress, State Department and Pentagon all deceived or universally deceiving on the issues of weapons of mass destruction? Didn't France, Germany and Russia want more time given to weapons inspections for these WMDs or were they being deceived also? Finally, if Iraq had no such weapons, was Saddam deceiving the entire Western world making us believe he had such murderous capabilities? Or was he deceiving the entire Eastern world into believing he was the front line against the evil Western infidels while all the while trying to deceive the United States, Great Britain, NATO and the United Nations?

The old saying; "You can fool some of the people some of the time, but you can't fool all of the people all of the time", fits this scenario. Nothing more ludricous than we were all deceived. Just about as ludicrous as Sadaam's election where 99%+ voted for him. BTW, where were they all WTSHTF?

Let the discussion ensue Dave.
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

The same people who said wait “forever” back in March are now the same ones in such a big hurry to find something. Why would you need mobile trucks to produce gas for balloons? Why would you keep those same trucks so near sterilely clean? Maybe they were trying to start a new mobile maid cleaning service that goes door to door? I’d like to get them to clean my cars. Why did they need all the chemical suits? Why were all the schools, hospitals, and mosques over there turned into virtual armories with stores of weapons and munitions?

They media must continue to sensationalize its news coverage and find different slants on stories or no one will read or listen to them. Good news doesn’t sell papers and “nobody” cares so they pick at the scabs of old stories to make them bleed to interest their readers.

The bottom line is a very bad man is no longer in power to abuse his own people much less his neighbors and the rest of the world. Right now the biggest fear of the Iraqi people is that we will leave and somehow Saddam will come back and take over. Iraq is truly a “police action” now as Saddam emptied his criminal prisons and mental institutions just prior to the war’s beginning and many of the problems there are being caused by those people on the loose. Why doesn’t the media talk about this?

One of the C-17 aircrews in my squadron last week brought out 250 million dollars in U.S.$100 dollar bills and over 40,000 pounds of gold bars to a location outside of Iraq so it can be returned later. Within the gold bars you could see the outlines of gold wedding rings and other pieces of jewelry. It was not the same kind of gold bar bricks as stored in Fort Knox. How do you suppose Saddam got hold of that? I haven’t seen any news media stories about that either. At least the people of Iraq have a chance now at a better life and something that many of them have never had before.........
FREEDOM.



** Bill **
1995 LSC-R'ed w/Recaro's and Cobra R's
Veteran of Carlisle 2000/01/02/03
[a href=//cardomain.com/member_pages/view_page.pl?page_id=258112]For Pic's and Mods click here[/a]

...Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make them all yourself....
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue


The same people who said wait “forever” back in March are now the same ones in such a big hurry to find something.

I would turn that around and ask why those people who were too impatient to wait for the inspectors to do their job are now asking us to "give it time".


Why would you need mobile trucks to produce gas for balloons?

According to the story, "Artillery balloons are essentially balloons that are sent up into the atmosphere and relay information on wind direction and speed allowing more accurate artillery fire. Crucially, these systems need to be mobile." Hey, it's a new one on me, I don't know.


Why would you keep those same trucks so near sterilely clean?

They couldn't be too sterilely clean if all the trailers had were canvas sides, open to the outside. And according to the experts, if they ever were used for bio-weapons, it would be nearly impossible to remove all traces of them. Yet no traces have been found. The lack of any traces of biological material would actually argue against weapons.

Why did they need all the chemical suits?

Supposedly, they were told WE would be using bio or chemical weapons on THEM. Could just be cover story on their part, I admit.

Why were all the schools, hospitals, and mosques over there turned into virtual armories with stores of weapons and munitions?

Because they were expecting an invasion! It's not unreasonable to expect them to scatter weapons in places where they might be needed, in places they thought we might not attack. It's nothing new, but it's got nothing to do with WMD though.


They media must continue to sensationalize its news coverage and find different slants on stories or no one will read or listen to them. Good news doesn’t sell papers and “nobody” cares so they pick at the scabs of old stories to make them bleed to interest their readers.

No argument there.

The bottom line is a very bad man is no longer in power to abuse his own people much less his neighbors and the rest of the world. Right now the biggest fear of the Iraqi people is that we will leave and somehow Saddam will come back and take over. Iraq is truly a “police action” now as Saddam emptied his criminal prisons and mental institutions just prior to the war’s beginning and many of the problems there are being caused by those people on the loose. Why doesn’t the media talk about this?

One of the C-17 aircrews in my squadron last week brought out 250 million dollars in U.S.$100 dollar bills and over 40,000 pounds of gold bars to a location outside of Iraq so it can be returned later. Within the gold bars you could see the outlines of gold wedding rings and other pieces of jewelry. It was not the same kind of gold bar bricks as stored in Fort Knox. How do you suppose Saddam got hold of that? I haven’t seen any news media stories about that either. At least the people of Iraq have a chance now at a better life and something that many of them have never had before.........
FREEDOM.

This is an argument for another time. Right now I'm out of it (time that is).
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

........................... At least the people of Iraq have a chance now at a better life and something that many of them have never had before.........FREEDOM.

This is an argument for another time. Right now I'm out of it (time that is).
Click to expand...

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


I heading back over there for another 15 days or so myself Tuesday morning. I don't argue with people who don’t know what they’re talking about and if you believe what some of the media is saying, you’re one of them. Travel in the region, talk to the people there, both the Iraqi people and our troops and see what’s really going on over there. Your responses to the United States using chemical weapons on Iraq and their reasons to keep weapons in hospitals, schools, and mosques is laughable as if those are the first targets we attack. If you seriously think what was going on over there the last 20 plus years was better than what their future is now, then you’re living in the wrong country.

This is nothing to argue over even if I had the time.


** Bill **
1995 LSC-R'ed w/Recaro's and Cobra R's
Veteran of Carlisle 2000/01/02/03
[a href=//cardomain.com/member_pages/view_page.pl?page_id=258112]For Pic's and Mods click here[/a]

...Learn from the mistakes of others. You can't live long enough to make them all yourself....
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue


"HELLO CLASS"

Saddam WAS the main weapon of mass destruction!
Listen to Bill and others that have been there.

Yes we will continue to search for "more wmd's", however
let me remind you that pre attack, during war, and post war,
has been a shorter period of tie than it took of convict
"bill clinton" of perjury.
Give them time. There is s lot of desert out there, not to
mention syria, iran, etc.

Would some of you rather have waited a year or two to find
out for sure?
Maybe we should put BS, Shan Penn, and a few others on
a herd of Camels and let them find them.
I'll tell you what is still over there, and thats a whole
lot of criminals, nut cases and fininacs that Saddam kicked
loose before we hung his closed sign out. Also a lot of
screwball ragheads from negighborihg country that fit the profile
"of a dangerous man", which is a man with absolutely nothing
to his name, ie: nothing to lose. This is a dangerous man.
Try listening to Fox News once in a while. :) Fuz
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

I heading back over there for another 15 days or so myself Tuesday morning. I don't argue with people who don’t know what they’re talking about and if you believe what some of the media is saying, you’re one of them. Travel in the region, talk to the people there, both the Iraqi people and our troops and see what’s really going on over there. Your responses to the United States using chemical weapons on Iraq and their reasons to keep weapons in hospitals, schools, and mosques is laughable as if those are the first targets we attack. If you seriously think what was going on over there the last 20 plus years was better than what their future is now, then you’re living in the wrong country.
Click to expand...

I think you missed my point. First off, I didn't say we would have used chemical weapons against the Iraqis. What I said was that THEY used that excuse to explain the chemical suits. I have no idea if their troops were actually told that by their leaders or if it was just a convenient way to explain them away.

As for the conventional weapons being in the hospitals, schools and mosques, the fact that those would be our last targets is exactly why they would have put them there. It's as simple as that. Nowhere did I say we would target those kind of buildings.

As for whether they are better off now, sure, having Saddam gone is a great thing for them. But what if they decide to exercise their newfound freedoms, and elect a government that isn't friendly to the U.S.? Will we be so happy for them when they bring in an Iran-style Ayatollah?

You're right. I haven't been there, so I don't know what's really going on. I'm subject to whatever the media tells me. But just how much contact have YOU had with regular Iraqis? I'm not asking to piss you off or challenge you, I'm asking an honest question. I don't think you can possibly know what the average Iraqi is really thinking while you're inside an air base or surrounded by a dozen or so heavily armed troops.

Like you said earlier, the media isn't interested in "happy" news of Iraqi citizens running up and hugging our troops. They tend to report only the bad news, like U.S. soldiers getting killed by "Baath Party supporters" and thousands of Shiites protesting in the streets against the United States' "occupation". Still, we certainly can't deny those things aren't going on. And they're not things to be swept under the rug.

I guess we'll all just have to wait and see what happens. I'm just not too optimistic things will turn out the way we wanted. But I'm just a dumb city boy, so it really doesn't matter what I think.
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

Like you said earlier, the media isn't interested in "happy" news of Iraqi citizens running up and hugging our troops. They tend to report only the bad news, like U.S. soldiers getting killed by "Baath Party supporters" and thousands of Shiites protesting in the streets against the United States' "occupation".
Click to expand...

You watch the wrong news. :)

http://members.tccoa.com/lastmrk/Images/lastmrk2.jpg
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

I'm just going to cut and paste my reply to one of my friends in an e-mail I sent when he asked about this topic. As follows:

"The fact that no WMD's were found can only mean one of two things. 1. They
never existed. 2. They existed but were hidden or destroyed. If they
never existed, then the U.S. has a problem, but we know for a fact that they
did exist, because a) they were used, and b) we know who sold them to Iraq.
So the question becomes "were they hidden or destroyed?"

If they were destroyed, then the U.S. (technically the U.N.) needed Iraqi
compliance to verify the destruction, which was the point of inspections.
Since the Iraqi cooperation was not forthcoming, the war is justified simply
on the basis of removing a known aggressive user of WMD's who will not
comply with the U.N. demand for proof of the destruction.

If they were moved to another country, then clearly Iraq violated the WMD
resolutions and the war is justified. The Americans now have every right to
occupy Iraq until they can verify either the destruction or current location
of the known WMD's.

The failure to find WMD's is irrelevant to the cause of the war. We know
they existed and the war was intended to verify their current status.
Failing Iraqi compliance, the war will always be justified by that original
intent."


Dave.
'02 Camaro SS
Former VIII owner.
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

I think what happened was the President assured everyone that there were "thousands of tons" (his words) of WMD, and now they can't find anything. Some have suggested that the Iraquis buried them....but let's not forget that the US has top notch satellite surveillance, and it is unlikely that thousands of tons of WMD could be buried without the US noticing. The US has apprehended some scientists, and military personel who certainly would know the wherabouts of such WMD, or at least offer some clues. I think what has happened, is that early on, support was 50/50..but the President's assurances brought that number up quite a bit based on his reasoning that the WMD were an imminent threat to the US (laughable). Maybe these people feel let down now?

And Bill...yes, Saddam is a bad man. No one has disputed that. But the President wasn't urging war just because Saddam was a nut-job. It was WMD being a danger to the US. That was his platform. That was what he was always trying to sell the UN on. Please don't try to tell us the US did this war for humanitarian reasons. Other countries could have used US intervention for humatiarian reasons long ago(Rwanda comes to mind). And yes, I'm sure the US has helped many people in Iraq, and that's grand. But the US has also lost many fine soldiers. And recently, I hear on the news "that people will have to accept that as long as the United States has a presence in Iraq, a few soldiers a week may die". Sorry, I don't accept that. Do you? That sucks ass.

At any rate, be safe while you are working.........
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

What I've heard now is that Paul Wolfowitz may or may not have said something to the effect of "There were many reasons to invade Iraq, but the WMD issue was the easiest to sell the public on." He claims he was misquoted. However, whether there were (are) WMD's over there or not, that is probably a true statement. And it doesn't say anything about decieving the public, or false information, but this seems to be what people are taking it as. Obviously, there was something over there. Whether it was hidden or removed, as Dave said, is the question at this point. We just need to find something so that people will stop seeing us as "the great satan" in this whole thing.

And Ron, no i don't accept that US soldiers need to die as long as we are over there. I hope that they can all return home safely. But this is still a war. These are the tactics our enemies are using now, to roll over and play dead, then make trouble when we take control. As has been said in the past, we're always ready to fight the last war we fought. We're taking note, though, the US armed forces learns pretty fast.
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

Some have suggested that the Iraqis buried them....but let's not forget that the US has top notch satellite surveillance, and it is unlikely that thousands of tons of WMD could be buried without the US noticing.

You've been watching too much Hollywood sensationalism.

..but the President's assurances brought that number up quite a bit based on his reasoning that the WMD were an imminent threat to the US (laughable).

Ron, a very large segment of the American people do not find this laughable... after recent events... right, wrong or indifferent, many do believe deeply in our hearts that pre-emptive moves such as Iraq are going to be necessary lest we restrict our responses to knee jerk reactions post haste.

But the President wasn't urging war just because Saddam was a nut-job. It was WMD being a danger to the US. That was his platform. That was what he was always trying to sell the UN on.

I distinctly recall the case initially being made solely upon Iraq's refusal to allow weapons inspectors to verify whether or not Iraq was complying with multiple UN resolutions. Only after the US, in the form of military preparedness, took material steps, inspectors were allowed in. Along the way, media reporting and spin-doctors mutated the issue to the muddy mess it is today. The fact is, we were on our way long before "WMD" joined the list of modern acronyms.

Platform???! This is not a political platform issue, as a lot of talking heads would like to make it out to be. These are issues of the soul, heart and conscience of the people of this country. As they seek leadership to reflect their own beliefs, the ideologies of both sides manifest themselves to take advantage of the current turn of events. Even worse are those who try to position themselves to be the benefactor of events yet to unfold.

IMHO, I never believed President Bush was trying to 'sell' the UN on anything. He was giving them the opportunity to be relevant, knowing full well their response would most likely be a modicum of meaningless resolutions as has proved in the past. This was so transparent in my view. Most likely this cajoled the diplomats in the state department. Unfortunately it was also seen by many as a 'sell' job gone bad.

But the US has also lost many fine soldiers. And recently, I hear on the news "that people will have to accept that as long as the United States has a presence in Iraq, a few soldiers a week may die". Sorry, I don't accept that. Do you? That sucks ass.

This is where the rubber meets the road. Unfortunately, the US has lost soldiers, and yes, as long as they are there, they will be inevitable targets. It is also unfortunate to loose lives to accidents, as the military has, in action or in exercises home or abroad. It is gravely unfortunate that soldiers would die in combat. It is even ghastly unfortunate they would be the targets of suicidal zealots. I don't want to accept it, but I do. I accept the fact that mistakes will be made, regardless of training, and some of these mistakes will result in fatalities. I accept the fact that despite our military superiority, there will be casualties in combat. I accept the fact that there are people in this world who would kill themselves in a misguided attempt at martyrdom, and there will be some who are successful in reaching their targets. That's what sucks ass, Ron
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

I think we all agree the ends cannot be used to justify the means. That is a basic cornerstone of the ethics I think we all share.

So, Saddam being out of power is the 'end'. No matter how great that is for how many people, [font size="5"] IF [/font] our government intentionally misled us , the American People, to reach that goal, that is WRONG and cannot be justified by anything that happens after the fact. I say this becasue I believe that the American People are the source of AUTHORITY in the USA and when GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES lie to the People to accomplish their goals that is a criminal act.

SAY WHAT?! It's more important that the American Gov't be truthful than the Iraqi people be saved from tyranny? Yes, I think so.

I think it is important that we as a nation look at the information that was presented to us by our gov't as the justification for war, and compare that to the reality of what we found when we got to the war.

[font size="5"]IF [/font] that evidence is found to have been contrived, the people who did that should be prosecuted for that criminal act. Saying, "Saddam was bad, now he's gone, so don't worry about why we went to war" is ethically and morally shallow - justifying the means by the ends.

IF we can say something like "our intelligence said this would be here, its not and this is why", that still would be acceptable, as long as it is clear that there was not a fabrication of evidence. Right now, there is not enough inforation flowing out about the search, so it looks bad for the administration.

I would rather the President say "we made a mistake in analyzing our inteligence and there were no WMDs still in Iraq", than to discover that they knew all along that it was lies.

Of course, I would even more rather them discover a hidden fortress with all the missing iraqis and weapons, and we take them all out in a big heroic battle, and we then know for sure it is all over, as we find Osama's and Saddam's bullet-riddled bodies slumped over barrels of Nerve Gas and Anthrax. What a tidy ending that would be. And we all lived happily ever after :^D



94 Mark VIII, Black / Black
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

"Iran agrees Iraq hid arms"


You're stooping pretty low if you have to use Iran (sworn enemy of Iraq)to prove your argument...LOL :)

And again....becuase I make tough statement it doesn't mean I'm anti-American. I said I don't accept Americans dying..does that sound anti-American?

The questions was what happened? I just think some people felt misled. If there were SOOOOO many WMD, than surely the finest inteligeence and armed forces in the world would be able to find them, no? I stand by my statement. The US has the finest surveillance/intelligence in the world. Bar none.

Maybe Bush twisted the truth a touch. Maybe not. Guess we will have to see where this ends up...
 
RE: Beware, political discussion may ensue

Ron, everyone knows you're anti-american, but since you live in Canada, you can pull it off. ;-)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top