Who put in the no fly zone again? (hint: not the UN)
Who was sponsoring state terror before the war? (hint:
Not Iraq)
Who put in the no fly zone again? (hint: not the UN)
Who was sponsoring state terror before the war? (hint:
Not Iraq)
He sure didn't take them seriously before 9/11.
Who used chemical weapons during the war? (hint: again not Iraq)
You understand the notion of what a leading question is? What presenting a false choice is? This isn't cross-examination.
You are going to have to try much harder than this.
I only repeated myself. Are you even going to address the chain of command or you just going to continue with the bluster? And lol at you trying to be someone you are not.
"All Knowledge is built upon instinctive belief, failing that there is nothing left." -Bertrand Russell
"Honor is simply the morality of superior men." -Henry Mencken
Officially Noted By Agloco
Fuzzy Fan Club: Cosmic Cowboy, TSA, Wild Cobra, Viva Las Espuelas
yeah he has disagreed with his dad's decision to stop and not go and finish saddam and his loyalists off. That has nothing to do with him wanting to go into a war to avenge his dad.
Yeah but that has nothing to do with your assertion that we want to make a colony. I remember when Bush said that he wanted to rid the world of evil and thought to myself "what?!" But Bush doctrine of premptively striking a country ran by a tyrant is different than some kind of nwo idea of nation building just to have american airports and seaports in the middle east. Plus we already had it in Saudi Arabia, UAE, turkey, and western afghanistan.The second reason is a quote from Condi Rice's testimony before congress. She flat out said that the rationale included discussions about the value of a stable democracy in the region. I remember watching that on tv and thinking at the time "Then why don't you say to the American people that is what you are doing"?
They didn't hate each other with a passion. Saddam did have al qeda in iraq to train. He also said any terrorist can train in iraq as long as they are targeting american or israeli interests. The part that bush and co. got wrong was that bin laden never had personal talks with saddam. Yeah the al queda and wmd's were definitely overused for sure. They should have focused on the un resolution violations; the attempted eradication of the kurds; and the fact that he would not allow the un inspectors to do their job. We should have also gone after governments and companies who went against our embargo.I don't happen to believe that we went to war with Iraq for oil. But we also didn't go to war with Iraq because they were supporting Al Quada. Because they weren't. Hussein and Osama Bin Laden hated each other with a passion. They were opposing Islamic followers (one Sunni and one Shia). But you have to admit that the Al Quaeda 'connection' was loudly and often touted as a reason to go to war with them.
Starting that war doesn't mean that Bush didn't care about our soldiers. He just cared about other things more.
Gone, But Not Forgotten:
Attack Troop 1-61 Cav
SPC Romig
Bayonette Troop 1-61 Cav
CPT Wallace
SFC Jarvis
SSG Oakes
SPC Ramsey
PFC Gassen
PFC Staggs
PV2 McLain
Comanche Troop 1-61 Cav
SPC Lutes
SPC Vargas
snc:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Jun16.htmlThe Sept. 11 commission reported yesterday that it has found no "collaborative relationship" between Iraq and al Qaeda, challenging one of the Bush administration's main justifications for the war in Iraq.
Along with the contention that Saddam Hussein was stockpiling weapons of mass destruction, President Bush, Vice President Cheney and other top administration officials have often asserted that there were extensive ties between Hussein's government and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network; earlier this year, Cheney said evidence of a link was "overwhelming."
But the report of the commission's staff, based on its access to all relevant classified information, said that there had been contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda but no cooperation. In yesterday's hearing of the panel, formally known as the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, a senior FBI official and a senior CIA analyst concurred with the finding.
The staff report said that bin Laden "explored possible cooperation with Iraq" while in Sudan through 1996, but that "Iraq apparently never responded" to a bin Laden request for help in 1994. The commission cited reports of contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda after bin Laden went to Afghanistan in 1996, adding, "but they do not appear to have resulted in a collaborative relationship. Two senior bin Laden associates have adamantly denied that any ties existed between al Qaeda and Iraq. We have no credible evidence that Iraq and al Qaeda cooperated on attacks against the United States."
Further the Pentagon did their own study they released in 2008 that says there was no link. Not 'wrong about meeting OBL' but no collaboration at all.
Quite frankly thinking that Saddam wanted an organization whose purpose was to create a Sharia state in his country to become relevant is dumb.
" Dear Mom and Dad,
You are the best. Thank you for taking good care of me. Thank you for buying all of my toys. Thank you for taking me to ausome places. I love you very much. And Happy Valentine's Day."
I don't know, what?
Ah. So I guess you would jump off a bridge if your superiors told you to. Cool. Nice to know.
Took three pages for a straw man to show up. Getting better, I guess.
Colin Powell Owes Us an Apology, Not Another Excuse
Has there been a more vastly overrated person in the past 50 years than Colin Powell?
He helped cover up My Lai.
He did his part to make sure that the Iran-Contra mess never came fully to light.
He buckled under to chickenhawk bullies in the Bush White House and did his part to lie us into a destructive war with a speech to the U.N. that he knew was based on stovepiped bullshit from people he already didn't trust.
And still, people trust him and revere him and, I have no doubt, if he came to them shilling another war, they'd salute and agree with him as devoutly as they did back in 2003, when he was before the UN talking about those lagoons of anthrax consomme that didn't really exist.
And now, of course, he's back with another book in which he polishes his own apple to a high gloss while ducking his responsibility for the greatest foreign-policy foul-up of our time. And he's still talking like a hapless apparatchik:
"By then, the President did not think war could be avoided," Powell writes. "He had crossed the line in his own mind, even though the NSC [National Security Council] had never met — and never would meet — to discuss the decision."
The president "didn't think war could be avoided"? Jesus H. Christ on a 10-day contract, at what point in his presidency did George W. Bush try to avoid a war with Iraq?
http://www.esquire.com/blogs/politic...#ixzz1uxpCvLBk
Last edited by boutons_deux; 05-15-2012 at 01:44 PM.
I don't know about Blake's thinking skills, but based on you making that post it's a pretty safe bet to say that you're a fucking idiot with no sense of humor and no idea what sarcasm is.
It's because he speaks so clearly.....for a colored fella.
There is a difference between understanding what another man's position is and what you would do in a mythical position.
Powell was told by his commander in chief of specific intelligence that indicated these things and he honored that. When how he had been used came to light, he just resigned his post.
Shoulda, woulda, coulda.
You are the one talking in strawman hypotheticals.
Thats a declarative compared to:Powell was told by his commander in chief of specific intelligence that indicated these things and he honored that. When how he had been used came to light, he just resigned his post.
I have another one: if you were a 1st lieutenant and you were commanded by your captain to assault a position on intelligence that you personally consider to be unreliable, what are you going to do?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
