Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake? - Page 20 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #191 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-27-2006, 05:38 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 - 2/27/2006 5:01 PM

Well I too am sick of explaining ad nauseum that the Iraqi invasion wasn't simply about WMDs. And that Bush didn't lie. And that the status quo with Iraq couldn't continue. And that Iraq was a threat.
Try reading through Bushs SOTUs and UN addresses prior to the invasion. But I am also trying to point out that there's plenty of room for criticism too.
It gets tiresome reading people creating straw men when they're trying to argue a point with me.
And if you honestly think my "intelligence" and "comprehension" are in question why do you bother debating?
For what it is worth, chiphomme, I think you are being much more reasonable now than in many other similar threads. There remains a difference between your outlook on America's role in the world, and mine, but that is not bothersome to me in the least. In fact, your humanitarian reasons for ending Saddam's reign are left of my outlook on life.

I do get bothered when I see what looks like smoothing the edges of the sequence of events to justify your other belief, the one where you suggest that Bush did not lie about the WMD to make the case for invading Iraq. WMD was the sales pitch and all the other reasons you cite, which are unselfish and humanitarian, were not. Read the Congressional Resolution that authorized the use of United States Armed Forces. It was carefully crafted to respond to the specifics of the request and justification the Bush administration made to have Congress authorize the invasion, under specific conditions. The Resolution specifically excludes humanitarian reasons for using US Armed Forces in Iraq.

I hear the line of thought that suggests Bush actually believed he would find the WMD. I also believe he believed that, not because the data he had available said there was an imminent threat anything like the threat he portrayed in the presentations he and Colin Powell and others in his administration made to the American people, Congress and the UN. Bush believed there were WMD in Iraq because he was sure there was going to be some old stash of undestroyed stuff from Bush #1's Iraq War to discover and hold up and justify the invasion from the WMD perspective.

President Kennedy set a standard for accusing another country of aggressive acts when he showed the world the Russian missiles being shipped to Cuba and then set up on Cuban soil. 40 years later and billions of dollars invested in spy satellite technology does a lot more. Tracking WMD movements to thwart UN inspectors should have been simple, and a high priority since that is what we were accusing the UN inspectors of being too dull to notice or deviously supporting. So, we either didn't try or we did and it was not apparent that any were being moved. To conclude we were somehow missing the movements without any basis for assuming there were WMD movements occuring anyway was delusional. As much as I find Bush unqualified, I am not convinced he is delusional yet.

Jim



JimSmith is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #192 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-27-2006, 06:18 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:
GermanStar - 2/27/2006 5:49 PM

Quote:
azimuth - 2/27/2006 3:37 PM

They are repeating what they suspect is the truth. If they do it enough, whether it is the truth or not will be irrelevant.
You have captured the current administration's chief method of communicating elegantly. Nicely done!
Exactly. If you look back at the record, they were very careful to mention Saddam and 9/11 in the same sentence, without actually saying that Saddam had anything specific to do with 9/11. They left that connection for the listener or reader to infer. It worked. Shortly after the invasion, a large percentage of Americans believed not only that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, but in fact that he was BEHIND 9/11. This is the way propaganda works. Later, when such a link was disproved by the 9/11 Commission and others, the Bush administration was able to say that they never made that direct connection, and by the strict letter of the record, they were correct; but of course, it was their intention to make that connection in the minds of the citizens, and make it they did.

The slow movement in the polls that show now that a majority of Americans do not believe the war was worth fighting is the result of the information finally getting through the fog of propaganda into the heads of the people.

Joe B.
Joe Bauers is offline  
post #193 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-27-2006, 06:19 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:
GermanStar - 2/27/2006 5:49 PM

Quote:
azimuth - 2/27/2006 3:37 PM

They are repeating what they suspect is the truth. If they do it enough, whether it is the truth or not will be irrelevant.
You have captured the current administration's chief method of communicating elegantly. Nicely done!
Exactly. If you look back at the record, they were very careful to mention Saddam and 9/11 in the same sentence, without actually saying that Saddam had anything specific to do with 9/11. They left that connection for the listener or reader to infer. It worked. Shortly after the invasion, a large percentage of Americans believed not only that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, but in fact that he was BEHIND 9/11. This is the way propaganda works. Later, when such a link was disproved by the 9/11 Commission and others, the Bush administration was able to say that they never made that direct connection, and by the strict letter of the record, they were correct; but of course, it was their intention to make that connection in the minds of the citizens, and make it they did.

The slow movement in the polls that show now that a majority of Americans do not believe the war was worth fighting is the result of the information finally getting through the fog of propaganda into the heads of the people.

Joe B.
Joe Bauers is offline  
post #194 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-27-2006, 06:24 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Shabah's Avatar
 
Date registered: Nov 2004
Vehicle: 300c (1956)
Location: 19 05'40.0 N, 49 49'09 E
Posts: 2,773
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
Joe Bauers - 2/27/2006 8:19 PM

Quote:
GermanStar - 2/27/2006 5:49 PM

Quote:
azimuth - 2/27/2006 3:37 PM

They are repeating what they suspect is the truth. If they do it enough, whether it is the truth or not will be irrelevant.
You have captured the current administration's chief method of communicating elegantly. Nicely done!
Exactly. If you look back at the record, they were very careful to mention Saddam and 9/11 in the same sentence, without actually saying that Saddam had anything specific to do with 9/11. They left that connection for the listener or reader to infer. It worked. Shortly after the invasion, a large percentage of Americans believed not only that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, but in fact that he was BEHIND 9/11. This is the way propaganda works. Later, when such a link was disproved by the 9/11 Commission and others, the Bush administration was able to say that they never made that direct connection, and by the strict letter of the record, they were correct; but of course, it was their intention to make that connection in the minds of the citizens, and make it they did.

The slow movement in the polls that show now that a majority of Americans do not believe the war was worth fighting is the result of the information finally getting through the fog of propaganda into the heads of the people.

Joe B.
Well yeah, remember when the US forces entered Baghdad? They wrapped the same flag from the Pentagon when it was hit... I wondered what the meaning of that was if it was not for a direct association of Iraq to the terrorist actions of 9/11. Here is a link showing those photos that did not get much traction back then: http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~condrey/RHE306/liberation/baghdad.html
Shabah is offline  
post #195 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-27-2006, 06:31 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:
Shabah - 2/27/2006 8:24 PM

Quote:
Joe Bauers - 2/27/2006 8:19 PM

Quote:
GermanStar - 2/27/2006 5:49 PM

Quote:
azimuth - 2/27/2006 3:37 PM

They are repeating what they suspect is the truth. If they do it enough, whether it is the truth or not will be irrelevant.
You have captured the current administration's chief method of communicating elegantly. Nicely done!
Exactly. If you look back at the record, they were very careful to mention Saddam and 9/11 in the same sentence, without actually saying that Saddam had anything specific to do with 9/11. They left that connection for the listener or reader to infer. It worked. Shortly after the invasion, a large percentage of Americans believed not only that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, but in fact that he was BEHIND 9/11. This is the way propaganda works. Later, when such a link was disproved by the 9/11 Commission and others, the Bush administration was able to say that they never made that direct connection, and by the strict letter of the record, they were correct; but of course, it was their intention to make that connection in the minds of the citizens, and make it they did.

The slow movement in the polls that show now that a majority of Americans do not believe the war was worth fighting is the result of the information finally getting through the fog of propaganda into the heads of the people.

Joe B.
Well yeah, remember when the US forces entered Baghdad? They wrapped the same flag from the Pentagon when it was hit... I wondered what the meaning of that was if it was not for a direct association of Iraq to the terrorist actions of 9/11. Here is a link showing those photos that did not get much traction back then: http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~condrey/RHE306/liberation/baghdad.html
I didn't realize that, Shabah, but it fits perfectly with their methodology. The one thing this administration is really good at is propaganda, and propaganda loves symbolism. The Pentagon flag served the purpose for which it was intended.

Joe B.
Joe Bauers is offline  
post #196 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-27-2006, 06:37 PM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,926
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 596 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
Joe Bauers - 2/27/2006 6:18 PM

Exactly. If you look back at the record, they were very careful to mention Saddam and 9/11 in the same sentence, without actually saying that Saddam had anything specific to do with 9/11. They left that connection for the listener or reader to infer. It worked. Shortly after the invasion, a large percentage of Americans believed not only that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, but in fact that he was BEHIND 9/11. This is the way propaganda works. Later, when such a link was disproved by the 9/11 Commission and others, the Bush administration was able to say that they never made that direct connection, and by the strict letter of the record, they were correct; but of course, it was their intention to make that connection in the minds of the citizens, and make it they did.

The slow movement in the polls that show now that a majority of Americans do not believe the war was worth fighting is the result of the information finally getting through the fog of propaganda into the heads of the people.

Joe B.
GW actually got so caught up in his administration's own bullshit that he actually stated that Saddam was behind the 9/11 attack during the first Kerry debate. I was so incredulous, I actually gasped (as did most in the audience), and Kerry found it necessary to remind him who Osama Bin Laden was. The entire Iraq affair just reeks of dishonesty. The administration's compensation of Iraqi expatriates for 'good' information, but not for 'true' information, the dismissal of the UN inspectors before they finalized their conclusion that Iraq had destroyed and/or disposed of their WMD capabilities, the use of 9/11 as a springboard to invade and occupy a non-combatant sovereign nation, the list goes on...

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS is offline  
post #197 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-27-2006, 06:40 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
azimuth's Avatar
 
Date registered: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,369
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
GermanStar - 2/27/2006 5:49 PM

Quote:
azimuth - 2/27/2006 3:37 PM

They are repeating what they suspect is the truth. If they do it enough, whether it is the truth or not will be irrelevant.
You have captured the current administration's chief method of communicating elegantly. Nicely done!
I have captured a device used by anyone who wishes to create a particular perception.

aborted Shop Forum member

azimuth is offline  
post #198 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-27-2006, 06:41 PM
BenzWorld Elite
 
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: 95 E300
Location: Inside my head
Posts: 36,850
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 392 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
GermanStar - 2/27/2006 8:37 PM

Quote:
Joe Bauers - 2/27/2006 6:18 PM

Exactly. If you look back at the record, they were very careful to mention Saddam and 9/11 in the same sentence, without actually saying that Saddam had anything specific to do with 9/11. They left that connection for the listener or reader to infer. It worked. Shortly after the invasion, a large percentage of Americans believed not only that Saddam had something to do with 9/11, but in fact that he was BEHIND 9/11. This is the way propaganda works. Later, when such a link was disproved by the 9/11 Commission and others, the Bush administration was able to say that they never made that direct connection, and by the strict letter of the record, they were correct; but of course, it was their intention to make that connection in the minds of the citizens, and make it they did.

The slow movement in the polls that show now that a majority of Americans do not believe the war was worth fighting is the result of the information finally getting through the fog of propaganda into the heads of the people.

Joe B.
GW actually got so caught up in his administration's own bullshit that he actually stated that Saddam was behind the 9/11 attack during the first Kerry debate. I was so incredulous, I actually gasped (as did most in the audience), and Kerry found it necessary to remind him who Osama Bin Laden was. The entire Iraq affair just reeks of dishonesty. The administration's compensation of Iraqi expatriates for 'good' information, but not for 'true' information, the dismissal of the UN inspectors before they finalized their conclusion that Iraq had destroyed and/or disposed of their WMD capabilities, the use of 9/11 as a springboard to invade and occupy a non-combatant sovereign nation, the list goes on...
Your guy lost the election anyway.

So did mine.

But I got over it.
Botnst is offline  
post #199 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-27-2006, 06:43 PM
BenzWorld Member
 
Date registered: Sep 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 308
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Send a message via AIM to Ammonium
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
chiphomme - 2/27/2006 5:01 PM

Quote:
Ammonium - 2/27/2006 3:24 PM

Quote:
elau - 2/27/2006 3:13 PM

Quote:
You have a low opinion of the "American people".
Why do you think the intervention in Kosovo was acceptable? Or Somalia?
Why do you think Clinton regretted not going into Rwanda?
The "American people" have an easier time stomaching humanitarian missions than you think.
If Bush would have said "look, Iraqis are dying by the thousands under this authoritarian monster with no end in sight. And in the age of Al Qaeda, knowing Saddam inclinations, the wise thing to do is end the misery." They could have use the WMD stuff as legal background but it shouldn't have been elevated as high as it was.
Iraq is and was the perfect opportunity to shake off the cold war alliances of convenience and act as the moral leader of the free world. Helping shed a dictator is the correct thing to do.
Chip,
First of all, you don't need to quote 3 pages to get to what you want to say.

Secondly, I think KV already answered most of your questions.

Thirdly, here I go in case you missed KV's answer. If GW would come out and be straight with the American people that he wanted a war because his poor daddy was being threatened, the whole country and the Congress would laugh him all the way back to 1700 Pennsylvanian Ave.

Fourthly, we not only shook off alliances of convenience, we shook off all alliances. America is more alone in the World's theater than ever.
Your major problem is you have a lot of "what if's". What if they had done this, what if they had said that. The fact of the matter is they didn't, and if they had done otherwise I doubt it would happen. If Bush had gone to congress and said "well guys, Saddam has been purging people since he took power(forget we gave him the means to do so), he tried to kill my dad, and I think he's a bad guy. Will you give me like 500 billion dollars to go get him?" Can you imagine the reaction he would get from people?

You need to simply get over the what if's and accept reality. We were told we were going to Iraq for WMD's and an al-queda connection. None of this freeing people and humanitarian bullshit. The United States has a shitty record when it comes to humanitarian efforts. We've yet to fight a war (Bosnia/Kosovo kind of) on purely humanitarian grounds. Even when we went into WW2 the jewish extermination camps were not a widely known fact. We went into WW2 because they attacked us, not because we wanted to save some jews.

Honestly, I'm sick watching people explain things to you over and over again. It starts looking like you can't comprehend the situation at large, which may say something about your level of intelligence.

Well I too am sick of explaining ad nauseum that the Iraqi invasion wasn't simply about WMDs. And that Bush didn't lie. And that the status quo with Iraq couldn't continue. And that Iraq was a threat.
Try reading through Bushs SOTUs and UN addresses prior to the invasion. But I am also trying to point out that there's plenty of room for criticism too.
It gets tiresome reading people creating straw men when they're trying to argue a point with me.
And if you honestly think my "intelligence" and "comprehension" are in question why do you bother debating?



That's the point chip, it was all always about WMD's and never about the people of Iraq. Bush doesn't give a damn about the people in Iraq. Bush never once in his SOTU or any other speach he gave, did he mention going into Iraq to liberate the people as a defining reason.

Why bother to continue reading if you know everything already?

Jim,
Lets be frank. Chips resolution on the humanitarian aspect is only because that's the only thing the invasion of Iraq has going for it still. That's also been the drum beat of the administration after their WMD's and Bin Ladin link went up in smoke.
Ammonium is offline  
post #200 of 237 (permalink) Old 02-27-2006, 06:46 PM
Administratoris Emeritus
 
GeeS's Avatar
 
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 44,926
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 596 Post(s)
RE: Are Bush Supporters ready to admit Iraq was a collossal mistake?

Quote:
Botnst - 2/27/2006 6:41 PM

Your guy lost the election anyway.

So did mine.

But I got over it.
Actually, your guy won ('since GW is a lock in LA, I'll vote Libertarian'), and I didn't have a guy, so nothing to get over.

"If spending money you don't have is the height of stupidity, borrowing money to give it away is the height of insanity." -- anon
GeeS 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