Lots of people knew it, Dave, including Bush I, Colin Powell, Richard Clark and a bunch of other folks GW put on ignore. You tell me now that you understand the dynamics of the region, how was it going to come down any other way? Enlighten me Dave - it's Monday, and I could use a good swift kick in the ass to get the blood flowin'...
Lots of people knew it, Dave, including Bush I, Colin Powell, Richard Clark and a bunch of other folks GW put on ignore. You tell me now that you understand the dynamics of the region, how was it going to come down any other way? Enlighten me Dave - it's Monday, and I could use a good swift kick in the ass to get the blood flowin"...
Good Monday to you.
It was not ever going to lead to a different place than where we are right now...but it could have been justifiable.
Two separate issues.
If a person truly believed that Sadaam's "failure to disarm" was a threat that needed to be dealt with without regard to the "balance of power" issue in the region, then you could rationally elect to invade. That is the decision Hillary made.
I give you credit for correctly predicting the chaos that would ensue.
As far as knowing that Sadaam had know weapons, I think you made a lucky guess, frankly.
If we had uncovered a stockpile of WMDs wrapped in bubble-wrap, and addressed to O. Bin Laden, care of Al Quaeda, Nuke America Division...I would say that the current debacle would be justified and a small price to pay.
I don't think I am contradicting myself.
I would like to hear your comments on the video clip. (I edited the original post to remove the part where I was snarky.)
Was she (and everyone else) supposed to neglect all the information that our intelligence community had to offer and to form their own fact-finding commissions to go to Iraq and find out the "real truth"? Well, maybe it would have been nice considering the partisan lies and misinformation that the pollitically biased "intelligence community" offered up while trying to make pieces fit, but it really isn't practical.
Vehicle: 1988 560SEL sold: 2006 Honda Element EX-P 2007 A4 Avant 2.0T
Location: Level 42
Posts: 3,777
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaveN007
If we had uncovered a stockpile of WMDs wrapped in bubble-wrap, and addressed to O. Bin Laden, care of Al Quaeda, Nuke America Division...I would say that the current debacle would be justified and a small price to pay.
IF is and remains to be the operative word.
Also, did the intelligence ever make a solid connection between Saddam and Osama?
No price is small as far as unnecessary casualties are involved.
__________________ . . . .
Only think of two things - the gun and the tape. When you hear the one, just run like hell until you break the other. .
It was not ever going to lead to a different place than where we are right now...but it could have been justifiable.
What, you're not buying the "Iraqi Freedom" or the "Fighting them there so we don't have to fight them here" justifications?
You're not being a good Republican sheep, you know.
Remember, a main tenet of the Art of War is to never expose your true intentions. (He must have had someone read it for him.) The one bit of truth that slipped out from this administration was the "Mission Accomplished" banner the day they got their hands on the pumps.
Pumping their oil is the only constant. It was the only objective. Any discussion beyond that is convoluted naivete baited from politically biased circumlocution.
Was she (and everyone else) supposed to neglect all the information that our intelligence community had to offer and to form their own fact-finding commissions to go to Iraq and find out the "real truth"? Well, maybe it would have been nice considering the partisan lies and misinformation that the pollitically biased "intelligence community" offered up while trying to make pieces fit, but it really isn't practical.
My point is that the decision to invade Iraq was a rational, reasonable one from the POV of EVERYONE in power at the time. No partisan lies here. Unless they spanned three administrations and both parties.
Using the current situation as a political tool with the benfit of hindsight...NO WMD's...is simply naked politics.
When Cheney said, "We know where they [WMD's] are. They are to the South, North, West, East, and surrounding areas of Baghdad," he was saying it with conviction. He didn't say, "I think I know where they are."
That was a lie.
The buck should stop SOMEWHERE, shouldn't it?
During the Cuban missile crisis, we had a photo that they showed us. There they were. Missiles.
This time, we were told that they HAD THE EVIDENCE. No two ways about it. We couldn't be shown because it was a matter of national security, but they have seen the evidence, and it is plain as day. That was a lie.
Now I for one can not trust them for anything. Now what?
What would a patriot do?
Last edited by Gregs300CD : 01-29-2007 at 10:55 AM.
It had been well established that Saddam had no nukes, so in reality, we're discussing biological weapons here. The kind of weapons that lots of countries have, including us, Russia, China, N. Korea, the list goes on. Could Iraq deliver such a payload to U.S. soil? No. Would Iraq even be interested in delivering such a payload to U.S. soil? Unlikely, since there are equally appealing targets much closer to home, including but not limited to Israel.
Saddam and Bin Laden had no interest in each other. Unlike Bin Laden, Saddam's primary interest was survival, autonomy and a life of debauchery and luxury. Bin Laden was not a vehicle toward that end.
But you're right, it was a guess on my part, no doubt. The thing is, I just don't think it mattered. Pakistan has WMDs, Pakistan has a relationship of sorts with Al Qaeda. Why are you not terrified of Pakistan? Iraq was already under our thumb, they were a minor concern at best. Bottom line is that I never gave a rat's ass about WMDs. This whole 'do as I say, not as I do' thing just doesn't wash with me.
I checked out the Hilary video, but I really can't stomach 8 minutes of her, and the video/sound quality didn't help either.
And as for the biological weapons, we knew the stuff he had was way past its shelf life. But why beat a dead horse? It's just meant to distract from the truth.
Linear Mode
