[Proto]

Caring, sharing Tony seems to have changed his position more than slightly.

Comments anyone?

The Independent

[Zeeman]

Well, honestly, even if they are there, they would be pretty damn hard to find. pick any old where in the middle of a desert, dig hole, dump. Only by sheer luck would it be found.

I'm still in the "where are the wmd's" camp though, that WAS the justification of the war. We all know those missiles with a 150km range were a huge threat to the globe...

Still, Saddam is out. At least some good came of it. I just hope it turns out for the best, I dearly want all the co-alition soldiers to get home safe, and the Iraqis to have a prosperous future.

Z...

Edit - changed US to Co-alition.

[Jungleboy]

Who cares that they didnt find any weapons of mass distruction! Sure it would have been good to keep the moral crusaders in their place! Its just a shame that thats the justification that was needed in these overly politically correct times we live in to get rid of such a POS, but basically sadam hussein was an evil murderous dictator that should have been exterminated a long time ago and the world is a better place for millions because of it, end of story!

[CBRVFR]

Proto, The idea that the discovery of an assload of WMD would silence ( or reverse the opinion of..) the critics of US/UK policy is, as Blair would say, patently absurd.

Do you know ANYONE who has changed their mind on this subject since the outbreak of hostilities?

They found illegal chemical weapons shells that SH was supposed to have destroyed, and those those who would be aplologists for US policy act as if they're apocolyptic triggers.Those opoposed call them "blister gas", as if one would just contract a cold sore from exposure.

They'll find WMD, probably just before the US elections, and it won't make a goddamned difference. We know he's got them because WE gave him WMD to use against Iran. The Germans sold him the capability to manufacture chemical weapons, and the French have REPEATEDLY sold him the technology to make nuclear weapons. (Remember Osiriak ?)

All of us hate despotic, murderous, destabilizing tyrants. It comes down to defining who that is. For those that think that more adequately describes George Bush than Saddam Hussein, I'd venture to say your head's up your ....arse.

But please continue to exercise your right of free speech. Because the poor bastards in the mass graves in Iraq can't.

[ND4SPD]

Do you do anything but stir the pot?

[nedro]

Originally Posted by ND4SPD

Do you do anything but stir the pot?

Dude! He lives on a damp smelly little Island with nothing to do except pay outrageous taxes and get photo radared any time he thinks about stepping out of line and you wonder why he stirs the pot.

[bwhip]

Originally Posted by CBRVFR

Proto, The idea that the discovery of an assload of WMD would silence ( or reverse the opinion of..) the critics of US/UK policy is, as Blair would say, patently absurd...
But please continue to exercise your right of free speech. Because the poor bastards in the mass graves in Iraq can't.

Well said, CBRVFR!

[TAZ]

Originally Posted by Jungleboy

Who cares that they didnt find any weapons of mass distruction! Sure it would have been good to keep the moral crusaders in their place! Its just a shame that thats the justification that was needed in these overly politically correct times we live in to get rid of such a POS, but basically sadam hussein was an evil murderous dictator that should have been exterminated a long time ago and the world is a better place for millions because of it, end of story!

Well, although what you say is true...
I don't really care if there are WMD or not. It does matter to me, though, that the US used this as justification for ousting Hussein, trying to drum up international support (which it didn't exactly do) based on this justification. When the ploy failed, we went to Iraq anyway. Because we haven't found WMD, it makes the US look bad for making WMD the reason we felt it necessary to go to war.

Bush might have been better off if he'd just come out and said "We don't care if anyone helps us or not. We're going to remove Saddam Hussein and his regime from power because he's an evil, murdering tyrant, and the people of Iraq deserve better. Also, we'd like some favorable oil prices, and US companies will benefit in the eventual reconstruction effort, after we've blown up much of their already-weak infrastructure - and this will help our struggling economy. Now, step up and help, or get the F out of our way."

[Zippy]

You nailed it, Taz.

[luvtolean]

Originally Posted by CBRVFR

Do you know ANYONE who has changed their mind on this subject since the outbreak of hostilities?

Me. I thought the war was a political ploy at first. After looking into it I realized it was definately the right thing to do.

[CBRVFR]

Originally Posted by luvtolean

Me. I thought the war was a political ploy at first. After looking into it I realized it was definately the right thing to do.

Then you, my friend, have an exceedingly rare condition called intellectual integrity.


Note: Exposure to the media during an election year may cure cure this !!

[nedro]

I suppose Proto would have been just fine living in a world with Hitler as long as England wouldn't have been bombed. Sad really.

[luvtolean]

Originally Posted by CBRVFR

Note: Exposure to the media during an election year may cure cure this !!

This is why I don't have cable TV.

[deez]

Originally Posted by TAZ

Well, although what you say is true...
I don't really care if there are WMD or not. It does matter to me, though, that the US used this as justification for ousting Hussein, trying to drum up international support (which it didn't exactly do) based on this justification. When the ploy failed, we went to Iraq anyway. Because we haven't found WMD, it makes the US look bad for making WMD the reason we felt it necessary to go to war.

Bush might have been better off if he'd just come out and said "We don't care if anyone helps us or not. We're going to remove Saddam Hussein and his regime from power because he's an evil, murdering tyrant, and the people of Iraq deserve better. Also, we'd like some favorable oil prices, and US companies will benefit in the eventual reconstruction effort, after we've blown up much of their already-weak infrastructure - and this will help our struggling economy. Now, step up and help, or get the F out of our way."

Wow a Taz post I agree with J/k man, good post. I totally agree. Anyone see 60 minutes Sunday? A guy Bush fired said 2 months into his presidency that Bushy was plotting to go over there. Finally someone who'll stand up and say that Iraq and that evil bastard Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. No WMD, no real connections to 9/11 = Liar Bush. At this point, I'll take another Republican in there, anyone, get get this guy out.

[TAZ]

Originally Posted by booth23

No WMD, no real connections to 9/11 = Liar Bush.

I don't know if "liar" is a truly appropriate title for him. I mean, he's not really fooling anyone, right? When it came to justifying the Iraq invasion, it was pretty apparent he was just going through the motions, saying what he was "supposed" to say, just because that's what is acceptable/politically correct. And then the US went and did what it wanted to do, regardless.

Funny thing is, at a high level, I don't know if I even disagree with that approach. Fact is, I'm sick of "political correctness", because it encourages people to say what people want to hear, instead of what the speaker/author REALLY means to say. On a tangent, I feel that (particuarly) when it comes to race/religion sensitivity, I say "enough already! Get over it!" If everyone treated each other as they'd like to be treated, the world would be a swell place.

[Baketech]

Originally Posted by booth23

Anyone see 60 minutes Sunday? A guy Bush fired said 2 months into his presidency that Bushy was plotting to go over there. Finally someone who'll stand up and say that Iraq and that evil bastard Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11. No WMD, no real connections to 9/11 = Liar Bush. At this point, I'll take another Republican in there, anyone, get get this guy out.

You mean Paul "I wish I could take it back now" O'Neill?
Old Thread
Try to keep up spanky.....

[deez]

Originally Posted by Baketech

You mean Paul "I wish I could take it back now" O'Neill?
Old Thread
Try to keep up spanky.....

[Baketech]

Originally Posted by booth23

Read the rags today....he's now saying he wishes he could take it back...and is disappointed that his words are being distorted by the left.

Funny thing....he got canned initially for speaking off the cuff and fooking things up....should have learned his lesson....

[BDA116]

The 'plans to invade Iraq' months after taking office were just re-writing the plans in place.
In 1997, klinton set the American policy of 'regime change' in Iraq, and had invasion plans made for him. He was too worried about blow jobs than Iraq, though.
When Bush took office they did go over the plans in place in the White House, and did make changes so they would be effective if ever needed.
However, these plans were not even close to what happened.
Interesting how the lefty media chooses to omit the 1997-2000 part of the story.
A whole five minutes of research will show you that, which unfortunately is five minutes more than the neo lib faithful are willing to give.

[Proto]

Not exactly hot off the press but ...............

David Kay quits

[Baketech]

Originally Posted by Proto

Not exactly hot off the press but ...............

David Kay quits

Is this one of those "Welcome to Last Month" threads.....

[Proto]

I don't know. Is it?

If it is, then I'm sure that Booth will be along to tell us. and can you give me a link to the dicussion that follwed the original post. I'd be interested in reading some ofthe responses. Thankyou

[Baketech]

Originally Posted by Proto

I don't know. Is it?

Old news....a month ago he was whining because he "didn't have enough resources and people to find the goods".......so he got asked to leave, now he has turned 180.....