Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake? - Page 14 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #131 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-24-2006, 02:26 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
elau's Avatar
 
Date registered: Oct 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,392
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
Most of the anti Iraq war folks on this board aren't better informed they're moveon.org lemmings. If you buy into their group think you're not getting an accurate picture.
They repeat mindless memes until they turn into "facts"(eg Bush lied). They're a tiresome morally vacuous bunch.
Here you are wrong again. It appears you are the mis-informed one here.

'95 R129
'04 G35.5 BS
'10 X204
elau is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #132 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-24-2006, 02:27 PM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
chiphomme's Avatar
 
Date registered: Oct 2005
Vehicle: 2008 CLK63 Black Series, 2008 Cayenne GTS
Location: Fargo, ND
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
GermanStar - 2/24/2006 9:51 AM

Quote:
JimSmith - 2/23/2006 11:18 PM

Given there are probably another 50 pages of text that never mention these "seed stocks" again, and nowhere is the type of Biological Weapon these "seed stocks" represent noted. In fact, the bulk of the actual factual reporting says things like "there was no evidence to support that Saddam was doing this, that or the other thing" yet Chip, you get hung up on the near meaningless, rumor-like clauses that Duelfer hangs on the end with lines like "but the ISG still thinks he could have done something if he tried again in the future" all of which are unsupported. Which, in my book means they amount to no more than gratuitous, sycophantic, and toadyish gesturing and bowing. Either read the Duelfer report in its entirety and quote from it in context or just put it down.
Yeah, using the Duelfer Report to excuse this invasion in sorta like using the blue dress stain to exonerate Clinton. It is without a doubt, the most comical, surreal pro-Iraq-invasion defense I've heard, and I thought I had heard them all. Good luck with your attempt to address the issue with sound reasoning.


Are you acknowledging that you haven't read damn thing?
What's comical is reading people like you using post invasion WMD findings as "proof" you were correct even when they aren't that clear. My use of Deulfer was a counter to the argument Saddam wasn't a threat. Deulfer showed that not to be the case.
The invasion itself was justified by many more things than just stockpiles of WMDs. Is that hard for you to wrap your brain around?

Oh I forget. If there isn't an invasion of the US planned it's not worth Americas effort.
chiphomme is offline  
post #133 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-24-2006, 02:28 PM
BenzWorld Senior Member
 
chiphomme's Avatar
 
Date registered: Oct 2005
Vehicle: 2008 CLK63 Black Series, 2008 Cayenne GTS
Location: Fargo, ND
Posts: 480
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
elau - 2/24/2006 4:26 PM

Quote:
Most of the anti Iraq war folks on this board aren't better informed they're moveon.org lemmings. If you buy into their group think you're not getting an accurate picture.
They repeat mindless memes until they turn into "facts"(eg Bush lied). They're a tiresome morally vacuous bunch.
Here you are wrong again. It appears you are the mis-informed one here.
elaborate
chiphomme is offline  
post #134 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-24-2006, 02:48 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
elau's Avatar
 
Date registered: Oct 2002
Location: Maryland
Posts: 5,392
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 4 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Read your own writing.

'95 R129
'04 G35.5 BS
'10 X204
elau is offline  
post #135 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-24-2006, 02:59 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Jan 2005
Posts: 350
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
elau - 2/24/2006 11:51 AM

Joe,
That is the reason why the anti-war folks are generally the better informed ones as opposed to the run of the mill jar heads, like Chip here.

We laid out the financial burdens of this war almost the very next day of the invasion, and had stayed the course since. Most people supported this war out of emotional factors, with a little help of this Administration's lies. They don't realize they pawned away their children and grandchildren future. Now we are on the verge of pawning away America's reputations as well.
Exactly. The Daily Show recently played a tape of the Bush administration flunkie who proclaimed just prior to the invasion that the effort could not possibly cost more than $1.7 billion of U.S. funds. Not possible, he said. When that figure was challenged by an administration number cruncher at the time--a man who said he thought it could go as high as $200 billion--that number cruncher was shown the White House door. Paul Wolfowicz, who proclaimed that the war would cost ZERO in U.S. funds (Iraqi oil to finance the whole thing, he said), was rewarded with the presidency of the World Bank for being so magnificently wrong.

It's sort of like George Tenet, total CIA screw-up (he of the "slam dunk" comment about the existence of WMD in Iraq) being awarded the Medal of Freedom by Bush.

As for comments that anti Iraq war people being of only one political stripe--recently, Colin Powell's longtime Chief of Staff appeared on the public television show NOW and proclaimed that the case made before the United Nations for the Iraq war was a grand "hoax," and that he, personally, now feels sick about the role he played in it. He suggested that Powell was uncomfortable with much of the "intelligence" he was to present, and insisted that Tenet appear with him at the U.N.

Richard Clarke, self-proclaimed independent who "usually" votes Republican blew the whistle on the Bush administration's obsession with Iraq, as far back as the very first cabinet meeting in January, 2001. Ditto Paul O'Neill, lifetime Republican and Bush's first treasury secretary, who noted this obsession in his book.

And Jack Murtha, 37 year Marine veteran and a Democrat who initially supported the war, has now disavowed it, calling it a policy of "delusion."

I wonder if old Chipper, who brags about his 9 years of Marine Corps service, might concede that Murtha's 37 years in the corps should at least qualify him somewhat to comment on the Iraq fiasco.

Joe B.
Joe Bauers is offline  
post #136 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-24-2006, 06:15 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
chiphomme - 2/23/2006 5:11 PM

Quote:
kvining - 2/23/2006 3:47 PM

Quote:
chiphomme - 2/22/2006 7:29 PM

Quote:
elau - 2/22/2006 7:26 PM

Quote:
chiphomme - 2/22/2006 7:02 PM

And the choir sings on.
I assume you still "for" it? Good, when can I help shipping you out? They desperately need warm bodies there. The insurgencies are soon running out of infidels to pick off the street corners. You will make a good one.

I take it youre still a supporter of the Baathist regime responsible for a million peoples deaths?
Is there still time to turn you over to a baathist holdover insurgent group?



Why should the American Taxpayer give a fuck about how many people Saddam has killed? Dictators kill people every day. Are we to invade them all? Is the purpose of the US Army to sacrifice the lives of our kids because some dictator is killing people, or is it to protect the United States? Quit living in dreamland - there was never any "higher purpose" here - it's always been a fucking oil grab, by people who don't care if your kid dies or not.


So you're an isolationist? I can respect that.
No, I simply believe in the tenets set out by William Techumseh Sherman:

1) War is hell, AND IS THE MOST IMMORAL ACT THAT A SOCIETY CAN UNDERTAKE

2) If one agrees 1) is true, and if one is themselves a moral person, than one should only engage in war with the GREATEST RELUCTANCE and with a firm moral footing before it is engaged in. Bush did and had neither.

3) Once those decisions are made, the US Armed Forces have one mission: to completely destroy the enemy, without mercy. Armies, peoples, economies, must be subject to total destruction. If we are unwilling or desirous to do otherwise, we SHOULD NOT ENGAGE IN IT. Half measure warfare, wars of occupation, European-style imperialistic wars intended to set up puppet governments or colonies, all are anethema to a democratic people. Democratic societies simply are not designed to engage in colonization or nation building, or wars of occupation.

Every war we have been in where these tenets have been violated have ended badly, and every war we have fought where we have followed them have ended well.

Bush blatantly hijacked the 9-11 tragedy so he could inturn hijack the American military to do the bidding of his oil fat cat friends. Michael Moore had it right, and we are now seeing proof of it every day - behind the Bushes are the corporate boards of the international oil companies and the weapons cartels, and these boards are made up of Arabs and oil companies who wanted Saddam gone for one reason, and one reason only - so they could make more money. They put the children of this country in the grave for their naked fucking greed.


Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #137 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-24-2006, 06:25 PM Thread Starter
BenzWorld Elite
 
FeelTheLove's Avatar
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 83 Astral Silver 280 SL
Location: Planet Houston
Posts: 28,829
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 8 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
chiphomme - 2/24/2006 4:27 PM

Quote:
GermanStar - 2/24/2006 9:51 AM

Quote:
JimSmith - 2/23/2006 11:18 PM

Given there are probably another 50 pages of text that never mention these "seed stocks" again, and nowhere is the type of Biological Weapon these "seed stocks" represent noted. In fact, the bulk of the actual factual reporting says things like "there was no evidence to support that Saddam was doing this, that or the other thing" yet Chip, you get hung up on the near meaningless, rumor-like clauses that Duelfer hangs on the end with lines like "but the ISG still thinks he could have done something if he tried again in the future" all of which are unsupported. Which, in my book means they amount to no more than gratuitous, sycophantic, and toadyish gesturing and bowing. Either read the Duelfer report in its entirety and quote from it in context or just put it down.
Yeah, using the Duelfer Report to excuse this invasion in sorta like using the blue dress stain to exonerate Clinton. It is without a doubt, the most comical, surreal pro-Iraq-invasion defense I've heard, and I thought I had heard them all. Good luck with your attempt to address the issue with sound reasoning.


Are you acknowledging that you haven't read damn thing?
What's comical is reading people like you using post invasion WMD findings as "proof" you were correct even when they aren't that clear. My use of Deulfer was a counter to the argument Saddam wasn't a threat. Deulfer showed that not to be the case.
The invasion itself was justified by many more things than just stockpiles of WMDs. Is that hard for you to wrap your brain around?

Oh I forget. If there isn't an invasion of the US planned it's not worth Americas effort.
Come on chip - the whole Duefler thing was an attempt to put lipstick on a pig. He was a Bush stooge who replaced a guy who resigned rather than be part of this fraud. Things were so thin, that the best Duefler could come up with, and it is in your post, is that Saddam "wanted to do it". Sending ten of thousands of women and children to their deaths because he "might" do it? That was the best Shemp Deuffler could come up with to make his boss look good.

Recall that earlier generations faced down fascism and communism not just with missiles and tanks, but with sturdy alliances and enduring convictions. They understood that our power alone cannot protect us, nor does it entitle us to do as we please. Instead, they knew that our power grows through its prudent use; our security emanates from the justness of our cause, the force of our example, the tempering qualities of humility and restraint.

-President Barack Obama, 1st Inaugural address
FeelTheLove is offline  
post #138 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-24-2006, 06:34 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
chiphomme - 2/24/2006 4:08 PM
I have read thing thing thoroughly. Yes stockpiles weren't found but it states over and over again about Saddams maintenance of WMD capabilities and his goal of pursuing them again. That isn't MY opinion it's Charles Deulfer's.

Chiphomme, the primary issues I have with your presentation of the Duelfer Report exonerating those who believed in the WMD story, and still believe, are:
1. The report contains facts, like no WMD or capability to make WMD or capability to recreate quickly a WMD production facility in Iraq since approximately 1996, and then opinions about what Saddam's contorted brain was thinking about, and you presented the Duelfer opinions in the report as facts. Had you merely stated the opinion of Duelfer, as presented in the Duelfer Report, is this or that, and accurately repeated the words of the Duelfer Report in context, I would likely have been less likely to be so contentious. But you didn't.
2. For example the seed stocks found after the invasion of March 2003 are noted as BW-related not BW seed stock in the Duelfer Report, and were never specifically identified even though Duelfer felt the need to conduct an elementary biochemistry of Biological Weapons seminar in the same section the BW-related seed stocks are mentioned. The seed stock claim you kept up chucking like it was a major finding, actually has no substance, and you repeatedly threw it up on the page, without ever mentioning that specific seed stock was only BW-related. You very purposely and repeatedly pointed to this obscure phrase in a god knows how many page long document of mostly superfluous biochemistry jargon that adds nothing to the findings of the report, an never put the clause in the context of "BW-related" and never specifically identified or discussed again. This leads me to doubt you actually read the document yourself for this particular "nugget" before you threw it up on the page here.
3. You need to reread Duelfer Report, preferably with a serious hang-over or some other means to blot out your prejudiced view of the words. There is no evidence supporting any specific findings of "Saddam's maintenance of WMD capabilities and his goal of pursuing them again" to quote you, or your opinion on Duelfer's opinion on the subject. There is a lot of conjecture that in the ISG's opinion Saddam desired very much to maintain the ability to produce WMD, and that the ISG believed Saddam wanted to pursue a WMD program again, specifically to protect Iraq from Iran (why not mention how many times the Duelfer Report cites same sources for generating the "Saddam wants a WMD program" opinion reporting Saddam had no specific plans or desires to pick a fight with the US?). But there was clearly no corroboration of these beliefs with hard data or hardware.

Also, read it from the perspective of a military man such as yourself who was given orders for a specific mission, and, failed to complete the mission successfully, knowing this was going to damage the strategic value of your superior's battle plan. Duelfer could have written a brief description of the process used, and then, a few paragraphs of the lack of success finding the WMD. Which would likely have been very traumatic for him and the Commander in Chief, so he added lots and lots and lots of opinions to dilute the facts and make the answer less obviously a cut and dried failure of the Bush administration.

Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #139 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-25-2006, 10:19 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
kvining - 2/24/2006 8:15 PM

No, I simply believe in the tenets set out by William Techumseh Sherman:

1) War is hell, AND IS THE MOST IMMORAL ACT THAT A SOCIETY CAN UNDERTAKE

2) If one agrees 1) is true, and if one is themselves a moral person, than one should only engage in war with the GREATEST RELUCTANCE and with a firm moral footing before it is engaged in. Bush did and had neither.

3) Once those decisions are made, the US Armed Forces have one mission: to completely destroy the enemy, without mercy. Armies, peoples, economies, must be subject to total destruction. If we are unwilling or desirous to do otherwise, we SHOULD NOT ENGAGE IN IT. Half measure warfare, wars of occupation, European-style imperialistic wars intended to set up puppet governments or colonies, all are anethema to a democratic people. Democratic societies simply are not designed to engage in colonization or nation building, or wars of occupation.

Every war we have been in where these tenets have been violated have ended badly, and every war we have fought where we have followed them have ended well.

Bush blatantly hijacked the 9-11 tragedy so he could inturn hijack the American military to do the bidding of his oil fat cat friends. Michael Moore had it right, and we are now seeing proof of it every day - behind the Bushes are the corporate boards of the international oil companies and the weapons cartels, and these boards are made up of Arabs and oil companies who wanted Saddam gone for one reason, and one reason only - so they could make more money. They put the children of this country in the grave for their naked fucking greed.
We have gone over this a number of times. The Nintendo war fighting methods our government invests in make it seem like wars can be fought that are not so messy, not so horrific and not so costly. This tempts politicians to use war for other purposes, like correcting an injustice somewhere else in the world. All because we are deluded by our high tech weapons and how they can assure victory against less technically sophisticated people.

KV has it right. IF you are not fighting to survive, the fight is just not compelling for anyone but the guys who started it. Which is a recipe for failure. Jim
JimSmith is offline  
post #140 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-25-2006, 10:21 AM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 2014 E250 Bluetec 4-Matic, 1983 240D 4-Speed
Location: USA
Posts: 9,257
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Quoted: 256 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

I think the site is overloaded again. What is the deal? Jim
JimSmith is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply

  Mercedes-Benz Forum > General Mercedes-Benz Forums > Off-Topic

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the Mercedes-Benz Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in











  • Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
     
    Thread Tools
    Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
    Email this Page Email this Page
    Display Modes
    Linear Mode Linear Mode



    Posting Rules  
    You may post new threads
    You may post replies
    You may not post attachments
    You may not edit your posts

    BB code is On
    Smilies are On
    [IMG] code is On
    HTML code is Off
    Trackbacks are On
    Pingbacks are On
    Refbacks are On

     

    Title goes here

    close
    video goes here
    description goes here. Read Full Story
    For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome