Couldn't believe my ears - Page 16 - Mercedes-Benz Forum

LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #151 of 382 (permalink) Old 06-02-2009, 02:59 PM Thread Starter
Administratoris Emeritus
GeeS's Avatar
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 45,193
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 737 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
In direct response to a question about Iraq, Bush said "the enemy attacked us". I saw the debate, I was startled by the response, as was much of the audience (collective gasp). It was about the worst ass-kicking I had ever seen in a debate, possibly even worse that Bentsen-Quayle.

LEHRER: Mr. President, new question. Two minutes. Does the Iraq experience make it more likely or less likely that you would take the United States into another preemptive military action?

BUSH: I would hope I never have to. I understand how hard it is to commit troops. Never wanted to commit troops. When I was running -- when we had the debate in 2000, never dreamt I'd be doing that.

But the enemy attacked us, Jim
, and I have a solemn duty to protect the American people, to do everything I can to protect us.

I think that by speaking clearly and doing what we say and not sending mixed messages, it is less likely we'll ever have to use troops.

But a president must always be willing to use troops. It must -- as a last resort.

I was hopeful diplomacy would work in Iraq. It was falling apart. There was no doubt in my mind that Saddam Hussein was hoping that the world would turn a blind eye.

And if he had been in power, in other words, if we would have said, "Let the inspectors work, or let's, you know, hope to talk him out. Maybe an 18th resolution would work," he would have been stronger and tougher, and the world would have been a lot worse off. There's just no doubt in my mind we would rue the day, had Saddam Hussein been in power.

So we use diplomacy every chance we get, believe me. And I would hope to never have to use force.

But by speaking clearly and sending messages that we mean what we say, we've affected the world in a positive way.

Look at Libya. Libya was a threat. Libya is now peacefully dismantling its weapons programs.

Libya understood that America and others will enforce doctrine and that the world is better for it.

So to answer your question, I would hope we never have to. I think by acting firmly and decisively, it will mean it is less likely we have to use force.

LEHRER: Senator Kerry, 90 seconds.

KERRY: Jim, the president just said something extraordinarily revealing and frankly very important in this debate. In answer to your question about Iraq and sending people into Iraq, he just said, "The enemy attacked us."

Saddam Hussein didn't attack us. Osama bin Laden attacked us. Al Qaida attacked us.
And when we had Osama bin Laden cornered in the mountains of Tora Bora, 1,000 of his cohorts with him in those mountains. With the American military forces nearby and in the field, we didn't use the best trained troops in the world to go kill the world's number one criminal and terrorist.

They outsourced the job to Afghan warlords, who only a week earlier had been on the other side fighting against us, neither of whom trusted each other.

That's the enemy that attacked us. That's the enemy that was allowed to walk out of those mountains. That's the enemy that is now in 60 countries, with stronger recruits.

He also said Saddam Hussein would have been stronger. That is just factually incorrect. Two-thirds of the country was a no-fly zone when we started this war. We would have had sanctions. We would have had the U.N. inspectors. Saddam Hussein would have been continually weakening.

If the president had shown the patience to go through another round of resolution, to sit down with those leaders, say, "What do you need, what do you need now, how much more will it take to get you to join us?" we'd be in a stronger place today.

"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
post #152 of 382 (permalink) Old 06-02-2009, 04:34 PM
BenzWorld Elite
Date registered: Feb 2007
Vehicle: 300SD
Location: Florida, USA
Posts: 11,191
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 62 Post(s)
p100 is offline  
post #153 of 382 (permalink) Old 06-02-2009, 04:57 PM
BenzWorld Elite
mcbear's Avatar
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Stuantle View Post
Re. stuff in red. I can't agree since there is no proof. Did they let it be implied? Most likely.
Did you just shut your eyes, put your hands over your ears and go Lalalalalala for all that time?

THIS is the essence of the denial that has so frustrated folks who read it and just say WTF?. That something that is so easily provable, so easily shown to be correct and yet there is a subset of NeoCons who still try to deny that Bush and Cheney ever actively linked Iraq to 9/11.

And it is a shame that the Iraq/9/11 connection is not the only example that still blares forth. You guys ask why we still bring up Bush. THIS IS WHY WE STILL BRING UP BUSH.


Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #154 of 382 (permalink) Old 06-02-2009, 05:00 PM
DP's Avatar
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 190E, 400E, SLK350
Location: Chesapeak Bay
Posts: 64,292
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 1067 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Originally Posted by Stuantle View Post
Every word of both. She listed no proof that GW stated there was a link.

Try again, but I warn, you are running out of chances.
Warning me that I am running out of "chances"? Are you serious?

She listed NO PROOF that GW linked Saddam to Osama is EXACTLY the point of the propaganda she was behind. Read my observation at the end of that post again before you give me another ultimatum
GW played along because they needed her and her friends to spread the word without them directly getting their hands dirty. Do you get it?
DP is offline  
post #155 of 382 (permalink) Old 06-02-2009, 05:07 PM
BenzWorld Elite
mcbear's Avatar
Date registered: Apr 2004
Vehicle: E500Es
Location: The BlueGrass State
Posts: 29,579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
Originally Posted by Stuantle
^Suggested, imlplied, declared, whatever. When did this happen and is there a quote. If he said in no uncertain terms that Saddam was directly involved with 9-11 then I will spit on him for doing so.
Cheney IRAQ/9/11 Doubletalk

Cheney blasts media on al Qaeda-Iraq link
Says media not 'doing their homework' in reporting ties

Friday, June 18, 2004 Posted: 2:25 AM EDT (0625 GMT)

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Vice President Dick Cheney said Thursday the evidence is "overwhelming" that al Qaeda had a relationship with Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq, and he said media reports suggesting that the 9/11 commission has reached a contradictory conclusion were "irresponsible."

"There clearly was a relationship. It's been testified to. The evidence is overwhelming," Cheney said in an interview with CNBC's "Capitol Report."

"It goes back to the early '90s. It involves a whole series of contacts, high-level contacts with Osama bin Laden and Iraqi intelligence officials."

"The press, with all due respect, (is) often times lazy, often times simply reports what somebody else in the press said without doing their homework."

Members of 9/11 commission found "no credible evidence" that Iraq was involved in the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks carried out by al Qaeda hijackers, and they concluded that there was "no collaborative relationship" between Iraq and Osama bin Laden, the network's leader, according to details of its findings disclosed Wednesday at a public hearing.

However, the commission also found that bin Laden did "explore possible cooperation with Iraq."

Cheney told CNBC that cooperation included a brigadier general in the Iraqi intelligence service going to Sudan, where bin Laden was based prior to moving his operations to Afghanistan, to train al Qaeda members in bomb-making and document forgery.

Both Cheney and President Bush are strongly disputing suggestions that the commission's conclusion that there were no Iraqi fingerprints on the 9/11 attacks contradicts statements they made in the run-up to the Iraq war about links between Iraq and al Qaeda.

Bush, who has said himself that there is no evidence Iraq was involved in 9/11, sought to explain the distinction Thursday, saying that while the administration never "said that the 9/11 attacks were orchestrated" with Iraqi help, "we did say there were numerous contacts between Saddam Hussein and al Qaeda."

"The reason I keep insisting that there was a relationship between Iraq and Saddam and al Qaeda [is] because there was a relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda," the president said. (Full story)

In his CNBC interview, Cheney went a bit further. Asked if Iraq was involved in 9/11, he said, "We don't know."

"What the commission says is they can't find evidence of that," he said. "We had one report, which is a famous report on the Czech intelligence service, and we've never been able to confirm or to knock it down."

The uncorroborated Czech report, which has been widely disputed, alleged that 9/11 ringleader Mohammed Atta met with an Iraqi intelligence agent in Prague before the attacks.

Asked if he knows information that the 9/11 commission does not know, Cheney replied, "Probably." - Cheney blasts media on*al Qaeda-Iraq link - Jun 18, 2004


Being smart is knowing the difference, in a sticky situation between a well delivered anecdote and a well delivered antidote - bear.
mcbear is offline  
post #156 of 382 (permalink) Old 06-02-2009, 08:47 PM
DP's Avatar
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 190E, 400E, SLK350
Location: Chesapeak Bay
Posts: 64,292
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 1067 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Bush's speech to the Nation giving Saddam48 hours to leave Iraq
March 18, 2003
My fellow citizens, events in Iraq have now reached the final days of decision.

For more than a decade, the United States and other nations have pursued patient
and honorable efforts to disarm the Iraqi regime without war. That regime
pledged to reveal and destroy all of its weapons of mass destruction as a
condition for ending the Persian Gulf War in 1991.

Since then, the world has engaged in 12 years of diplomacy. We have passed more
than a dozen resolutions in the United Nations Security Council. We have sent
hundreds of weapons inspectors to oversee the disarmament of Iraq.

Our good faith has not been returned. The Iraqi regime has used diplomacy as a
ploy to gain time and advantage. It has uniformly defied Security Council
resolutions demanding full disarmament.

Over the years, U.N. weapons inspectors have been threatened by Iraqi officials,
electronically bugged and systematically deceived. Peaceful efforts to disarm
the Iraq regime have failed again and again because we are not dealing with
peaceful men.

Intelligence gathered by this and other governments leaves no doubt that the
Iraq regime continues to possess and conceal some of the most lethal weapons
ever devised. This regime has already used weapons of mass destruction against
Iraq's neighbors and against Iraq's people.

The regime has a history of reckless aggression in the Middle East. It has a
deep hatred of America and our friends and it has aided, trained and harbored
terrorists, including operatives of Al Qaeda.
The danger is clear: Using
chemical, biological or, one day, nuclear weapons obtained with the help of
Iraq, the terrorists could fulfill their stated ambitions and kill thousands or
hundreds of thousands of innocent people in our country or any other.

The United States and other nations did nothing to deserve or invite this
threat, but we will do everything to defeat it. Instead of drifting along toward
tragedy, we will set a course toward safety.

Before the day of horror can come, before it is too late to act, this danger
will be removed.

The United States of America has the sovereign authority to use force in
assuring its own national security. That duty falls to me as commander of chief
by the oath I have sworn, by the oath I will keep. Recognizing the threat to our
country, the United States Congress voted overwhelmingly last year to support
the use of force against Iraq.

America tried to work with the United Nations to address this threat because we
wanted to resolve the issue peacefully. We believe in the mission of the United

One reason the U.N. was founded after the Second World War was to confront
aggressive dictators actively and early, before they can attack the innocent and
destroy the peace.

In the case of Iraq, the Security Council did act in the early 1990s. Under
Resolutions 678 and 687, both still in effect, the United States and our allies
are authorized to use force in ridding Iraq of weapons of mass destruction. This
is not a question of authority, it is a question of will.

Last September, I went to the U.N. General Assembly and urged the nations of the
world to unite and bring an end to this danger. On November 8th, the Security
Council unanimously passed Resolution 1441, finding Iraq in material breach of
its obligations and vowing serious consequences if Iraq did not fully and
immediately disarm.

Today, no nation can possibly claim that Iraq has disarmed. And it will not
disarm so long as Saddam Hussein holds power.

For the last four and a half months, the United States and our allies have
worked within the Security Council to enforce that council's longstanding
demands. Yet some permanent members of the Security Council have publicly
announced that they will veto any resolution that compels the disarmament of
Iraq. These governments share our assessment of the danger, but not our resolve
to meet it.

Many nations, however, do have the resolve and fortitude to act against this
threat to peace, and a broad coalition is now gathering to enforce the just
demands of the world.

The United Nations Security Council has not lived up to its responsibilities, so
we will rise to ours. In recent days, some governments in the Middle East have
been doing their part. They have delivered public and private messages urging
the dictator to leave Iraq so that disarmament can proceed peacefully.

He has thus far refused.

All the decades of deceit and cruelty have now reached an end. Saddam Hussein
and his sons must leave Iraq within 48 hours. Their refusal to do so will result
in military conflict commenced at a time of our choosing.

For their own safety, all foreign nationals, including journalists and
inspectors, should leave Iraq immediately.

Many Iraqis can hear me tonight in a translated radio broadcast, and I have a
message for them: If we must begin a military campaign, it will be directed
against the lawless men who rule your country and not against you.

As our coalition takes away their power, we will deliver the food and medicine
you need. We will tear down the apparatus of terror and we will help you to
build a new Iraq that is prosperous and free.

In free Iraq there will be no more wars of aggression against your neighbors, no
more poison factories, no more executions of dissidents, no more torture
chambers and rape rooms.

The tyrant will soon be gone. The day of your liberation is near.

It is too late for Saddam Hussein to remain in power. It is not too late for the
Iraq military to act with honor and protect your country, by permitting the
peaceful entry of coalition forces to eliminate weapons of mass destruction. Our
forces will give Iraqi military units clear instructions on actions they can
take to avoid being attack and destroyed.

I urge every member of the Iraqi military and intelligence services: If war
comes, do not fight for a dying regime that is not worth your own life.

And all Iraqi military and civilian personnel should listen carefully to this
warning: In any conflict, your fate will depend on your actions. Do not destroy
oil wells, a source of wealth that belongs to the Iraqi people. Do not obey any
command to use weapons of mass destruction against anyone, including the Iraqi
people. War crimes will be prosecuted, war criminals will be punished and it
will be no defense to say, "I was just following orders." Should Saddam Hussein
choose confrontation, the American people can know that every measure has been
taken to avoid war and every measure will be taken to win it.

Americans understand the costs of conflict because we have paid them in the
past. War has no certainty except the certainty of sacrifice.

Yet the only way to reduce the harm and duration of war is to apply the full
force and might of our military, and we are prepared to do so.

If Saddam Hussein attempts to cling to power, he will remain a deadly foe until
the end.

In desperation, he and terrorist groups might try to conduct terrorist
operations against the American people and our friends. These attacks are not
inevitable. They are, however, possible.

And this very fact underscores the reason we cannot live under the threat of
blackmail. The terrorist threat to America and the world will be diminished the
moment that Saddam Hussein is disarmed. Our government is on heightened watch
against these dangers. Just as we are preparing to ensure victory in Iraq, we
are taking further actions to protect our homeland.

In recent days, American authorities have expelled from the country certain
individuals with ties to Iraqi intelligence services.

Among other measures, I have directed additional security at our airports and
increased Coast Guard patrols of major seaports. The Department of Homeland
Security is working closely with the nation's governors to increase armed
security at critical facilities across America.

Should enemies strike our country, they would be attempting to shift our
attention with panic and weaken our morale with fear. In this, they would fail.

No act of theirs can alter the course or shake the resolve of this country. We
are a peaceful people, yet we are not a fragile people. And we will not be
intimidated by thugs and killers.

If our enemies dare to strike us, they and all who have aided them will face
fearful consequences.

We are now acting because the risks of inaction would be far greater. In one
year, or five years, the power of Iraq to inflict harm on all free nations would
be multiplied many times over. With these capabilities, Saddam Hussein and his
terrorist allies could choose the moment of deadly conflict when they are
We choose to meet that threat now where it arises, before it can
appear suddenly in our skies and cities.

The cause of peace requires all free nations to recognize new and undeniable
realities. In the 20th century, some chose to appease murderous dictators whose
threats were allowed to grow into genocide and global war.

In this century, when evil men plot chemical, biological and nuclear terror, a
policy of appeasement could bring destruction of a kind never before seen on
this earth. Terrorists and terrorist states do not reveal these threats with
fair notice in formal declarations.

And responding to such enemies only after they have struck first is not self
defense. It is suicide. The security of the world requires disarming Saddam
Hussein now.

As we enforce the just demands of the world, we will also honor the deepest
commitments of our country. Unlike Saddam Hussein, we believe the Iraqi people
are deserving and capable of human liberty, and when the dictator has departed,
they can set an example to all the Middle East of a vital and peaceful and
self-governing nation.

The United States with other countries will work to advance liberty and peace in
that region. Our goal will not be achieved overnight, but it can come over time.
The power and appeal of human liberty is felt in every life and every land, and
the greatest power of freedom is to overcome hatred and violence, and turn the
creative gifts of men and women to the pursuits of peace. That is the future we

Free nations have a duty to defend our people by uniting against the violent,
and tonight, as we have done before, America and our allies accept that

Good night, and may God continue to bless America.
DP is offline  
post #157 of 382 (permalink) Old 06-02-2009, 08:53 PM Thread Starter
Administratoris Emeritus
GeeS's Avatar
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 2021 SL770
Location: Fountain Hills, AZ
Posts: 45,193
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 737 Post(s)
(Thread Starter)
Originally Posted by Botnst View Post
Nice try, genius. Go back and look at my lengthy posts concerning why I supported the invasion of Iraq. Honesty is an elusive feature for you, isn't it?

Ask people who were here. I have always and consistently supported the invasion because of oil. No other reason was sufficient, IMO.

Anybody care to chime in who was here and recalls the drubbing I took for my support?
Confirmation: Bot always said it was about oil, in addition to other lessor reasons.

Drubbing? What drubbing?

"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 #158 of 382 (permalink) Old 06-02-2009, 09:07 PM
DP's Avatar
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 190E, 400E, SLK350
Location: Chesapeak Bay
Posts: 64,292
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 1067 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
President Bush's 2003 State of The Union Address, Jan 28, 2003

And this Congress and the American people must recognize another threat. Evidence from intelligence sources, secret communications and statements by people now in custody reveal that Saddam Hussein aids and protects terrorists, including members of Al Qaeda. Secretly, and without fingerprints, he could provide one of his hidden weapons to terrorists, or help them develop their own.

Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained. But chemical agents, lethal viruses and shadowy terrorist networks are not easily contained.

Imagine those 19 hijackers with other weapons and other plans, this time armed by Saddam Hussein. It would take one vial, one canister, one crate slipped into this country to bring a day of horror like none we have ever known.

We will do everything in our power to make sure that that day never comes.
Tell me if this doesn't qualify as linking Saddam to Al Qaeda through fear for another 911? Yeah, he was misinformed, that's the way out, please...
DP is offline  
post #159 of 382 (permalink) Old 06-02-2009, 09:21 PM
Cruise Control
Zeitgeist's Avatar
Date registered: Sep 2004
Vehicle: '87 300TD/'90 300D/'94 Quattro/'89 Vanagon TDI/'01 EV Weekender VR6
Location: Cascadia
Posts: 52,134
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Quoted: 1635 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
Originally Posted by GermanStar View Post
Confirmation: Bot always said it was about oil, in addition to other lessor reasons.

Drubbing? What drubbing?
I'll back that up. I still think that along with any rationale for that epic-fail fiasco is batshit craziness, but B's case for the war was always predicated on motives the Bush Administration wouldn't touch with a ten foot pole...publicly
Zeitgeist is offline  
post #160 of 382 (permalink) Old 06-02-2009, 09:21 PM
DP's Avatar
Date registered: Aug 2002
Vehicle: 190E, 400E, SLK350
Location: Chesapeak Bay
Posts: 64,292
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Quoted: 1067 Post(s)
Lifetime Premium Member
What can I say?

Full text
Transcript: George Bush's speech on Iraq

Following is the text of an address given by President Bush in Cincinnati
October 2002
We know that Iraq and the al-Qaida terrorist network share a common enemy: the United States of America. We know that Iraq and al-Qaida have had high-level contacts that go back a decade.

Some al-Qaida leaders who fled Afghanistan went to Iraq. These include one very senior al-Qaida leader who received medical treatment in Baghdad this year and who has been associated with planning for chemical and biological attacks.

We've learned that Iraq has trained al-Qaida members in bomb-making and poisons and deadly gases. And we know that after September 11 Saddam Hussein's regime gleefully celebrated the terrorist attacks on America.
When I spoke to Congress more than a year ago, I said that those who harbor terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists themselves. Saddam Hussein is harboring terrorists and the instruments of terror, the instruments of mass death and destruction, and he cannot be trusted. The risk is simply too great that he will use them or provide them to a terror network...

The evidence indicates that Iraq is reconstituting its nuclear weapons program. Saddam Hussein has held numerous meetings with Iraqi nuclear scientists . . . his "nuclear mujaheddin," his nuclear holy warriors.
And there's a reason. We have experienced the horror of September 11. We have seen that those who hate America are willing to crash airplanes into buildings full of innocent people. Our enemies would be no less willing, in fact they would be eager, to use biological or chemical or a nuclear weapon.
Knowing these realities, America must not ignore the threat gathering against us. Facing clear evidence of peril, we cannot wait for the final proof, the smoking gun that could come in the form of a mushroom cloud.
The attacks of September 11 showed our country that vast oceans no longer protect us from danger. Before that tragic date, we had only hints of al-Qaida's plans and designs. Today, in Iraq, we see a threat whose outlines are far more clearly defined and whose consequences could be far more deadly.
Saddam Hussein's actions have put us on notice, and there's no refuge from our responsibilities.
DP is offline  
Sponsored Links

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

Quick Reply

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


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

Email Address:


Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

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

Similar Threads
Topic Author Forum Replies Last Post
m110 for the ears minas de cobre W123 E,CE,D,CD,TD,TE Class 58 04-27-2009 08:42 PM
What's new in ya' ears? Qubes Off-Topic 4 11-09-2007 01:53 PM
For EARS and all nobby R/C107 SL/SLC Class 10 04-10-2006 09:22 PM
Ears This ones for you SSL R/C107 SL/SLC Class 35 02-04-2006 09:46 AM

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

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