Iraq is finally normalized

[fury]

id say assisnate the bastard.

jsut not by violent means

 

[Squiggy]

Lets tickle him to death!

 

[rrfield]

What pisses me off is that when this whole oust-Saddam thing started, it was justified because it's part of the "War on Terror". Then, magically, after Saddam had been ousted, "W" and Friends announce that there is/was/never will be a connection between Osama bin Ladden and Saddam.

I'm glad that my cousin and brothers lives are in danger so Bush and Friends can get back at a bully who tried to kill Georgies daddy. Oh, and so Dick Cheany can make a quick few-million.

rrfield

 

[Gonz]

"W" and Friends announce that there is/was/never will be a connection between Osama bin Ladden and Saddam.

That was never a claim. Blair, not Bush, put the :45 minute thing out.

This was about upholding the UN resolutions, stopping the WMD research & finding the weapons on hand, putting an end to a brutal dictator & getting our feet on ME soil-bringing the war to them so to speak.

Your brothers & cousins lives are in danger for A) the choice they made in joining the military & B) the exact same reasons all our lives are in danger, a bunch of radical extremists have decided to kill as many people as possible since we don't have the same religious beliefs as them.

 

[freako104]

easily done. poison food,starve him to death. toruture isnt always violent. neither is death

 

[rrfield]

That was never a claim. Blair, not Bush, put the :45 minute thing out.

Bush never claimed that Saddam was connected to bin Ladden?

But what about his State of the Union address?

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.

and then mentioning Saddam and Sept. 11th in the same breath...

Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/01/20030128-19.html

and then....

No, we've had no evidence that Saddam Hussein was involved with September the 11th

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A25571-2003Sep17?language=printer

Woah! What happened?!?

This was about upholding the UN resolutions, stopping the WMD research & finding the weapons on hand, putting an end to a brutal dictator & getting our feet on ME soil-bringing the war to them so to speak.

This was and is about revenge. Oh, and money.

Your brothers & cousins lives are in danger for A) the choice they made in joining the military & B) the exact same reasons all our lives are in danger, a bunch of radical extremists have decided to kill as many people as possible since we don't have the same religious beliefs as them.

Point A - This is correct. They knew the risk when they joined. No argument there.
Point B - If they were actually looking for Osama I would agree. Instead, they are in Iraq getting revenge for W. And Oil for Dick.

rrfield

edited for syntax errors

 

[Thulsa Doom]

Are we capturing, killing or deterring and dissuading more terrorists every day than the madrassas and the radical clerics are recruiting, training and deploying against us?

Does the US need to fashion a broad, integrated plan to stop the next generation of terrorists? The US is putting relatively little effort into a long-range plan, but we are putting a great deal of effort into trying to stop terrorists. The cost-benefit ratio is against us! Our cost is billions against the terrorists' costs of millions.

absolutely. why must we be so rigid about this? why must we take the 10,000 pound gorilla approach to fighting terrorism: invade, kick butt and blow up shit and then tell em we are doing it for their own good. we absolutely are losing serious ground this way. for every one terrorist we capture or kill 1000 more moderate muslims become sympathizers of these radicals because of our tactics. we need to do the SAME things the right wing terrorist supporting organizations are doing: funding schools. teaching the youth of iraq and afghanistan and malaysia and a dozen and a half other fundamentalist islamic countries. for years and years the political wings of these fundamental terrorist groups have been setting up these schools and for $25 A MONTH PER CHILD they teach them horrible things about unlce sam and the west in general and that we are all infadels that deserve death. well... why are we spending billions kicking over two bit armies and blowing up wedding parties with guided missles when we could be pouring a fraction of that into "counter training" in the places where its needed? why are we NOT supporting the moderate clerics who really dont like the terrorists but increasingly see america as unreasonable and bullying in their tactics? this really should have been going on all along. its a very slow process so we cant expect to see results from it right away. we are REALLY behind the curve on this...

 

[Gonz]

including members of al Qaeda

You initially said "a connection between Osama bin Ladden and Saddam". He said al qieda, not Usama.

Same breath or not, the quotes about saddam & 9/11 are not accusations or connections, as he pointed out later

Assumptions & politics made bad bedfellows.

 

[rrfield]

You initially said "a connection between Osama bin Ladden and Saddam". He said al qieda, not Usama.

Same breath or not, the quotes about saddam & 9/11 are not accusations or connections, as he pointed out later

Assumptions & politics made bad bedfellows.

Uhh, Osama is #1 in said terrorist group. A link to said terrorist group implies Osama.

The way Bush phrased his sentance gives the listener the impression that the two are indeed linked.

Before September the 11th, many in the world believed that Saddam Hussein could be contained.

He either lied or mislead. Take your pick.

rrfield

 

[Gonz]

What else was said?

The United Nations concluded in 1999 that Saddam Hussein had biological weapons sufficient to produce over 25,000 liters of anthrax -- enough doses to kill several million people. He hasn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

The United Nations concluded that Saddam Hussein had materials sufficient to produce more than 38,000 liters of botulinum toxin -- enough to subject millions of people to death by respiratory failure. He hadn't accounted for that material. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed it.

From three Iraqi defectors we know that Iraq, in the late 1990s, had several mobile biological weapons labs. These are designed to produce germ warfare agents, and can be moved from place to a place to evade inspectors. Saddam Hussein has not disclosed these facilities. He's given no evidence that he has destroyed them.

The International Atomic Energy Agency confirmed in the 1990s that Saddam Hussein had an advanced nuclear weapons development program, had a design for a nuclear weapon and was working on five different methods of enriching uranium for a bomb. The British government has learned that Saddam Hussein recently sought significant quantities of uranium from Africa. Our intelligence sources tell us that he has attempted to purchase high-strength aluminum tubes suitable for nuclear weapons production. Saddam Hussein has not credibly explained these activities. He clearly has much to hide.

Iraq is blocking U-2 surveillance flights requested by the United Nations. Iraqi intelligence officers are posing as the scientists inspectors are supposed to interview. Real scientists have been coached by Iraqi officials on what to say. Intelligence sources indicate that Saddam Hussein has ordered that scientists who cooperate with U.N. inspectors in disarming Iraq will be killed, along with their families.

damn this guy goes on forever...oh, here we go-in context

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. (Applause.)

Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late. Trusting in the sanity and restraint of Saddam Hussein is not a strategy, and it is not an option. (Applause.)

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country -- your enemy is ruling your country. (Applause.) And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. (Applause.)

Nope, nothing about revenge yet, still looking...

The world has waited 12 years for Iraq to disarm. America will not accept a serious and mounting threat to our country, and our friends and our allies. The United States will ask the U.N. Security Council...We will consult. But let there be no misunderstanding: If Saddam Hussein does not fully disarm, for the safety of our people and for the peace of the world, we will lead a coalition to disarm him. (Applause.)

And as we and our coalition partners are doing in Afghanistan, we will bring to the Iraqi people food and medicines and supplies -- and freedom. (Applause.)

Americans are a resolute people who have risen to every test of our time. Adversity has revealed the character of our country, to the world and to ourselves. America is a strong nation, and honorable in the use of our strength. We exercise power without conquest, and we sacrifice for the liberty of strangers.

Americans are a free people, who know that freedom is the right of every person and the future of every nation. The liberty we prize is not America's gift to the world, it is God's gift to humanity. (Applause.)

Sorry, I can't find the place that Bush said or implied Usama & saddam were sleeping together. Pretty good speech though. Kinda makes you think there was another reason. It's called LIBERERATION

 

[IDLEchild]

Freako

Assasinating anyone that US doesn't like isn't very well accepted by the rest of the world. I also believe it is illegal.

 

[Inkara1]

There's an executive order in place preventing assassination of other world leaders. That's why Saddam didn't die in 1991.

 

[freako104]

Freako

Assasinating anyone that US doesn't like isn't very well accepted by the rest of the world. I also believe it is illegal.

assassinating anyone is but in terms of dictatorship where the people are in jeopardy i think its justified. gonz was able to point out that mass grave sites of the victims of Sadam were found

 

[ris]

i think that osama bin laden and al quaida are some what synonomous.

the 45min claim in the uk governments september 2002 dossier was about iraq's wmd's, and now it is confirmed was referring to iraq's conventional weapons capability, as far as i recall there was little or no reference to links between al quaida and iraq in that dossier.

in the uk the government line changed 3 times on reasons for going to war as the first one, links between iraq and al qaida, were rubbished; the second, a genuine threat from wmd's was greeted with great scepticism [and is dogging them still today following the hutton enquiry]. finally they turned to the un route, which eventually took an attorny general's ruling to convince many.

 

[Squiggy]

And tonight I have a message for the brave and oppressed people of Iraq: Your enemy is not surrounding your country -- your enemy is ruling your country. (Applause.) And the day he and his regime are removed from power will be the day of your liberation. (Applause.)

Well there you have it. He lied....

 

[rrfield]

Do you really think Bush is going to come out and say "I'm doing this for revenge"? No, he's going to try to justify it to the American people through whatever means will work at the moment. Sept. 11th is perfect. "Hey, Osama is arab, Saddam is arab, I bet people will buy that they were tied together!" Nevermind that Iraq had a secular government and that is exactly what Osama and Al Queda were/are dead set against.

Oh, associating Saddam with Al Queda is the same thing as associating him with Osama, no matter how you try to spin Bush's words.

rrfield

 

[ris]

i don't think it had much to do with them both being arabs, or even muslims [hussien only very recently introduced a religious element to his regime to calm growing religious criticism]. i don't even buy the oil reason. i certainly don't think we and the us governments did it out of some wonderous altriustic benevolence.

i suppose when it comes down to it saddam was just a convenience, he's a reviled figure and has been since 1991. i think the governments knew that the general knee-jerk reaction to talking up war in iraq would be 'good, he's a bad man and we should finish the job we started 12 years ago' without necessarily looking at the information presented.

 

[Gato_Solo]

i don't think it had much to do with them both being arabs, or even muslims [hussien only very recently introduced a religious element to his regime to calm growing religious criticism]. i don't even buy the oil reason. i certainly don't think we and the us governments did it out of some wonderous altriustic benevolence.

i suppose when it comes down to it saddam was just a convenience, he's a reviled figure and has been since 1991. i think the governments knew that the general knee-jerk reaction to talking up war in iraq would be 'good, he's a bad man and we should finish the job we started 12 years ago' without necessarily looking at the information presented.

Which is pretty much what I said in another thread, and was told I was justifying the war by saying so. Too bad most people don't read between the lines, or ascribe certain viewpoints about the speaker because of the facts...