Paul Wolfowitz restates the case for...

[Yonivore]

...invading Iraq.


At the moment the U.N. inspectors were kicked out in '98, this is the proper language: there were substantial quantities of botulinum and aflatoxin, as I recall, some bioagents, I believe there were those, and VX and ricin, chemical agents, unaccounted for. Keep in mind, that's all we ever had to work on. We also thought there were a few missiles, some warheads, and maybe a very limited amount of nuclear laboratory capacity.

After 9/11, let's be fair here, if you had been President, you'd think, Well, this fellow bin Laden just turned these three airplanes full of fuel into weapons of mass destruction, right? Arguably they were super-powerful chemical weapons. Think about it that way. So, you're sitting there as President, you're reeling in the aftermath of this, so, yeah, you want to go get bin Laden and do Afghanistan and all that. But you also have to say, Well, my first responsibility now is to try everything possible to make sure that this terrorist network and other terrorist networks cannot reach chemical and biological weapons or small amounts of fissile material. I've got to do that.

That's why I supported the Iraq thing. There was a lot of stuff unaccounted for. So I thought the President had an absolute responsibility to go to the U.N. and say, "Look, guys, after 9/11, you have got to demand that Saddam Hussein lets us finish the inspection process." You couldn't responsibly ignore [the possibility that] a tyrant had these stocks. I never really thought he'd [use them]. What I was far more worried about was that he'd sell this stuff or give it away. Same thing I've always been worried about North Korea's nuclear and missile capacity. I don't expect North Korea to bomb South Korea, because they know it would be the end of their country. But if you can't feed yourself, the temptation to sell this stuff is overwhelming. So that's why I thought Bush did the right thing to go back. When you're the President, and your country has just been through what we had, you want everything to be accounted for.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol He's trying to act like it was the president's idea in the first place. Wolfie pushed invading Iraq from day one to the point of distraction from the job in Afghanistan.
Keep in mind, that's all we ever had to work on.Yes, we all know the invasion was based on a hunch.

[clambake]

We must find a way to keep terrorist from getting their hands on jet fuel.

By the way, the inspectors correctly concluded that Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction. Here begins the birth of lies.

[Yonivore]

I'm sorry, did I say Paul Wolfowitz? I meant to say Bill Clinton. My bad.

Bill Clinton [quoted here] (http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2005/11/20051115-1.html) , "His Side of The Story," Time, 6/28/04.

Oh, and you Blix fans. His final report stated there wer tons, t-o-n-s, of previously verifed VX that remained unaccounted for by Iraq.

[ChumpDumper]

Had Bill Clinton invaded Iraq, you'd have a point.

If that's how he felt and still feels, I disagree and always have.

[clambake]

Now, i'm sure Iran has tons of previously varified (chemical name to be inserted here as WH sees fit)

[clambake]

Maybe Clinton will say anything for a blowjob.

[ChumpDumper]

Also it's not clear if the context is invading and occupying Iraq or just going back to the UN to demand more inspections. I wish I could say the Bush administration is above taking things out of context, but they aren't and neither is Yoni.

[clambake]

Give him a break, I guess. Afterall, yoni thinks god sent bush to save our lives. This must be tough times, indeed.

[Yonivore]

Also it's not clear if the context is invading and occupying Iraq or just going back to the UN to demand more inspections. I wish I could say the Bush administration is above taking things out of context, but they aren't and neither is Yoni.
He said it in 2004. That would be after we invaded Iraq.

There's your context.

[boutons_]

On hunches, and "we thought",
3000+ US military dead,
1000s more dead to come,
the M/E desstabilized.

"lot of stuff unaccounted for"

absence of evidence turned out to be evidence of absence.

Nothing was there. The intelligence was MASSIVELY faulty.

The intelligence community KNEW there were serious doubts about every single bullshit "WMD" that the WH said were there, but those doubts were totally suppressed.

Fuck you, Wolfowitz, may you join Saddam in hell.

Keep trying your desparate "revisionism" all you want, Yoni, but your boys fucked up bad. The biggest geo-political fuckup in the history of USA.

And after they fucked up bad, they read the post-invasion scenarios wrong and mis-managed the war they didn't even foresee.

[Yonivore]

Fuck you, Wolfowitz, may you join Saddam in hell.
I guess you didn't see my correction.

Besides, what about Hussein's failure to abide by any of the provision of the '91 cease fire agreement?

How 'bout his continued threats against Kuwait?

Or, there were the several hundred incidents of him firing at our aircraft over the past 12 years.

Throw in his defiance of over a dozen UNSC resolutions, mass murder of Shi'ites in the south, committing the two most destructive environmental crimes in history [draining the wetlands and setting fire to the Kuwaiti oil fields].

Not to mention the rape rooms, torture chambers, and summary executions and, well, I think you've got plenty of justification for regime change.

Not accounting for WMDs after we were attacked on 9/11 was just the trigger, the straw that broke the camels back.

[Yonivore]

Oh yeah, and as tragic as the over 3,000 deaths are, if the war is justified -- and we obviously disagree on that point -- it is a miracle we have so few casaulties.

Compare this to any other military campaign in the history of warfare.

[boutons_]

"what about Hussein's failure to abide by any of the provision of the '91 cease fire agreement?"

how was that so fucking bad compared to what we have now?

"firing at our aircraft"

He didn't hit a single one in 12 years. yawn.
It was his country we were flying over, what would you do?

The Saddam situation wasn't good, but it was stable.

Saddam presented a counterweight to Iran. Now Iran is all over Iraq.

I'd trade Iraq Feb 03 in a millisecond for what dubya has produced since.
No fucking contest.

Kick the ugly but non-threatening Saddam/Iraq down the road, even until he dies, and go concentrate on the REAL threats to the world, in Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, east African.

[Yonivore]

"what about Hussein's failure to abide by any of the provision of the '91 cease fire agreement?"

how was that so fucking bad compared to what we have now?

"firing at our aircraft"

He didn't hit a single one in 12 years. yawn.
It was his country we were flying over, what would you do?

The Saddam situation wasn't good, but it was stable.

Saddam presented a counterweight to Iran. Now Iran is all over Iraq.

I'd trade Iraq Feb 03 in a millisecond for what dubya has produced since.
No fucking contest.

Kick the ugly but non-threatening Saddam/Iraq down the road, even until he dies, and go concentrate on the REAL threats to the world, in Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, east African.
And where did Zarqawi -- along with other al Qaeda -- go after we invaded Afghanistan?

Where did Abu Nidal live?

[ChumpDumper]

Besides, what about Hussein's failure to abide by any of the provision of the '91 cease fire agreement?What about them?
How 'bout his continued threats against Kuwait?Hopw about them? He wasn't in any position to invade Kuwait again. That's idiotic.
Or, there were the several hundred incidents of him firing at our aircraft over the past 12 years.Hey, thanks for reminding us Saddam was under our thumbs militarily, that every time he locked a radar onto a plane, we were able to destroy that radar. Thanks.
Throw in his defiance of over a dozen UNSC resolutions, mass murder of Shi'ites in the south, committing the two most destructive environmental crimes in history [draining the wetlands and setting fire to the Kuwaiti oil fields].

Not to mention the rape rooms, torture chambers, and summary executions and, well, I think you've got plenty of justification for regime change.Hah. We tolerated that for years when he was our boy. Don't make me get the Rumsfeld handshake pic.
Not accounting for WMDs after we were attacked on 9/11 was just the trigger, the straw that broke the camels back.It was the big excuse. Tha absolute worst one that turned out to be completely bogus. The one you tried to use fucking Bill Clinton to support your completely failed argument that you can't let go.

[ChumpDumper]

Oh yeah, and as tragic as the over 3,000 deaths are, if the war is justified -- and we obviously disagree on that point -- it is a miracle we have so few casaulties.

Compare this to any other military campaign in the history of warfare.Since only 118 were killed before "Mission Accomplished," that just proves just how weak Saddam's forces were and what a shitstorm we created all in the name of nonexistent WMDs.

[clambake]

You mean failed military campaign.

[boutons_]

"And where did Zarqawi -- along with other al Qaeda -- go after we invaded Afghanistan?

Where did Abu Nidal live?"

Who the fuck cares/cared where they were? If they were in Iraq, they were there at Saddam's pleasure, and nobody has any evidence they were "operating" in a way that would threaten the USA.

Abu Nidal + al Zarqawi + whoever = 3000+ US military dead and total Iraq instability?

jihadist al Quaida had little if any presence, or effective operations, in Saddam's secular Iraq. The Saddam - Al Qaida co-operation was essentially non-extistent and ineffective as threat to USA.

Saddam's Iraq was secular, the al-Qaida was rabidly "religious". Perhaps Saddam let a few hang around in Iraq as long as he felt they were no threat to himself.

All these rat turds you keep bringing back amount to a pile of rat turds that don't justify invading Iraq, 3000+ US military dead, and the current M/E instability about which the US can do nothing. Iraq is lost.

The real reason for the Iraq war was the dream-y, other-worldly, ideological goal from the neo-cons and AEI of installing democracy in Iraq. THAT would never fly with anybody, so the WHIG cherry picked and hyped intelligence, all of which proved to be massively faulty, floated out one by one, each unconvincing, with dichkead claiming repeatedly that Saddam was connecte to WTC (even dubya said not true), until they decided WMD would be their #1 smokescreen LIE (hiding the democracy goal) that they would rest their case on (Powell mobile bio lab at UN) to get the UN "authorization" while suppressing all serious doubts. Powell's bullshit was as bogus as all the rest of their bullshit.

Democracy in Iraq wasn't the real goal. Iraq was important to the US because of its oil and Iraq's proximity to other oil countries.

All of the above is really moot now.

dubya has created a geo-political disaster, (try to defend that), in Iraq and can't fix it. The Surge is just more bullshit, fucking around and killing time, and US militarhy, apparently "doing something", until dubya and dickhead can escape the WH 20 Jan 09.

To repeat, letting the Iraq situation of Feb 03 continue indefinitely, even worsen, was infinitely better than what we have now.

[johnsmith]

Fuck you, Wolfowitz, may you join Saddam in hell


I thought Boutons didn't believe in hell?

[George Gervin's Afro]

Oh yeah, and as tragic as the over 3,000 deaths are, if the war is justified -- and we obviously disagree on that point -- it is a miracle we have so few casaulties.

Compare this to any other military campaign in the history of warfare.


no yoni the proper context would be history of unecessary warfare

[boutons_]

The real, but hidden, case for the war (bring American-style democracy to the Iraq) was bullshit, and never stood on its own.

The WHIG public "reasons" Yoni is STILL promoting were all bullshit.
Saddam was not a threat to the USA.
Saddam was not involved in the al-Quaida war on USA

The Iraq war, in the context of the the REAL war on terror, was/is/forever totally unjustified.

The 3000 deaths are totally unjustified because nothing has been/will be accomplished from the deaths. The US military has been abused and wasted in Iraq by the Repugs.

[smeagol]

The real, but hidden, case for the war (bring American-style democracy to the Iraq) was bullshit, and never stood on its own.

The WHIG public "reasons" Yoni is STILL promoting were all bullshit.
Saddam was not a threat to the USA.
Saddam was not involved in the al-Quaida war on USA

The Iraq war, in the context of the the REAL war on terror, was/is/forever totally unjustified.

The 3000 deaths are totally unjustified because nothing has been/will be accomplished from the deaths. The US military has been abused and wasted in Iraq by the Repugs.
Not to mention the billions of $ that have been flushed down the drain and the loss of respect the US suffers with the rest of the world for this military adventure.

[Clandestino]

the u.s. shouldn't and doesn't give a fuck what the rest of the world thinks. just like life in general. you shouldn't make you decisions to appease others. you have to do what is best for you and your country/family/etc.

[smeagol]

the u.s. shouldn't and doesn't give a fuck what the rest of the world thinks. just like life in general. you shouldn't make you decisions to appease others. you have to do what is best for you and your country/family/etc.
And this war has done wonders for Americans :rolleyes

[boutons_]

"Not to mention the billions of $"

I don't mention $$$, since one wasted US military life is worth much more than the $Bs, although the radical right/neo-cunts/Repugs talk and act like military lives are really disposable cannon fodder rather than sacred assets to be treated with utmost care and circumspection.

"the u.s. shouldn't and doesn't give a fuck what the rest of the world thinks ... appease"

Playing the bullshit red-herring "appease" card again. Who said "appease"? Clanny.

The world is more interconnected and interdependent than ever.

The terrorist threat is so complicated and pervasive, the US, and every threatened country, needs all the support and co-operation it can get from friends.

When all of your major friends are against your proposal (eg, invade Iraq), you should really find out why you and they are so far apart. It turned out our friends were right, and the Repugs were wrong about Iraq.

The Repugs hubristically took Clanny's advice ("fuck all y'all, we're the best, we know best, we're busting up Iraq"), and committed worst geo-political fiasco in US history.

"best for you and your country/family/etc."

So Iraq qualifies as "best" ?

[Clandestino]

worst fiasco in history? hahaha.. simmer down.

either way, the u.s. will always be ridiculed for its decisions. damned if we do, damned if we don't. so, all things we do have to be in our best interests and not based on international opinion. remember, congress voted to invade iraq

[boutons_]

"worst fiasco in history"

typical misquote "worst fiasco in US history"

... and the multi-year consequences of that fiasco are still to come.

"congress voted to invade iraq"

bullshit. Any Congressinal Repugs who had doubts about Iraq were intimidated/bullied by assholes like Rove and DeLay. The rest of the Repugs were just rubber stamps.

The WH cherry picked the support "intelligence", which is now disposed of as "faulty" (ie, the WH means faultiness laid not with the WH but with their own NatSec boys), and brutally classified and surpressed all doubts in the NatSec people about the evidence. WHIG and NatSec even let Powell take a bogus case to the UN.

Yes, the Congress and the press fucked up, and let themselves be deceived, bullied, and intimidated by the WH into NOT checking/balancing/devils-advocating the "evidence", but the primary, overriding responsibility for Iraq is with WHIG and neo-cunts.

Now that the WH shit has hit the fan, you're trying to spread the responsibilty for Iraq far and wide. It's 100% on the WH and their neo-cunt ideologues.

[Clandestino]

there is no hope for you son. i feel sorry for you and your hatred for your country.

[clambake]

If he hated this country, then the actions of this administration would have him dancing in the streets.

[George Gervin's Afro]

there is no hope for you son. i feel sorry for you and your hatred for your country.


hatred for your country = not drinking GOP koolaid..

Bush is always right.. or you hate your country

[boutons_]

"hate your country"

non-sequitur.

You've just been owned, now run along and go fuck yourself.

[Clandestino]

congress voted for the war. repubs and demos. democratically elected by the people of the u.s.a.

and boutons, you've never owned anything nor anyone. you're a talker and not a doer like many of your other buddies. always bitching about shit and never doing anything. full shit, but no solutions

[boutons_]

"congress voted for the war"

true, but it's typical of your deep, repetitive dishonesty that it's only a half-truth, selected to support your losing side and position.

What have you done, Clanny, about any shit you've seen?

you can't whip my ass, so you think you can disqualify me from the fight.

[Clandestino]

"congress voted for the war"

true, but it's typical of your deep, repetitive dishonesty that it's only a half-truth, selected to support your losing side and position.

What have you done, Clanny, about any shit you've seen?

you can't whip my ass, so you think you can disqualify me from the fight.

:dramaquee :lmao

[boutons_]

wordless? cool, an self-imposed STFU

[Clandestino]

it is just that no matter what happens you blame bush. congress voted for the war. you say disregard that... then you come up with you can't whip my ass... haha... even though i'm sure i could. but it is funny to see you resort to that! haha.. you're a joke.

btw, there is a special on tin foil at heb. tell dan, i'm sure you guys are together playing d&d or something like that. get out of the house for a bit.

[gtownspur]

"congress voted for the war"

true, but it's typical of your deep, repetitive dishonesty that it's only a half-truth, selected to support your losing side and position.

What have you done, Clanny, about any shit you've seen?

you can't whip my ass, so you think you can disqualify me from the fight.


Hold your own congressmen accountable first for ignoring your plight, or put up and shut up.

[ChumpDumper]

:lol Blame your local congressman for the war! It was their idea! Not Bush's!

[Clandestino]

:lol Blame your local congressman for the war! It was their idea! Not Bush's!

if bush was so fucked up why did a majority of congressman side with him? do they not have a mind?

that is what i am saying.

[gtownspur]

:lol Blame your local congressman for the war! It was their idea! Not Bush's!


No, according to you, it was Paul wolfowitz's.


Second, they sold you out, so yeah their not saint's either.

[ChumpDumper]

It certainly was Wolfowitz et.al. that was the driving force behind it, but as you all are so happy to point out when it suits you, Bushy is the commander-in-chief and bears the ultimate responsibility for all of this.

And no, I won't let folks like Hillary Clinton off the hook. Many of the Democrats voted for the war simply out of fear of looking soft on national security or trying to guess how a military action might turn out. Both sides had folks acting out of sheer cynicism and political concern, ignoring the best interest of this country and the men and women they sent off to die.

Once the board Republicans can admit how badly the administration fucked up, the sooner they can get past their pussy blame deflection game and think about what really needs to be done.

[Clandestino]

also, CLINTON was the one that was quoted in the article.

[ChumpDumper]

We got that days ago, doofus.

[gtownspur]

We got that days ago, doofus.


well, obviously you're still stuck on blaming bush for the whole thing.

There was a congressional debate over this, if the evidence was that flimsy as liberals claim, then it could have been avoided.

Heck, we've made Tom Delay step with weaker evidence.

[ChumpDumper]

If 3,000 Americans had died because of Delay's indictment, you might have a point.

Bush is the decider and CINC. The others are complicit but he is ultimately responsible. Why can't Republicans accept that?

[gtownspur]

If 3,000 Americans had died because of Delay's indictment, you might have a point.

Bush is the decider and CINC. The others are complicit but he is ultimately responsible. Why can't Republicans accept that?


Why are you using Delays indictment? You totally missed my point.

I said that if congress made delay step down on weak evidence, they could have also in the same manner shot down Bush's war on by that token.


Trying to say that i'm linking Delay to the case for war being misused, is a cheap shot attempt at trying to best me. It works with Mookie and pixel since they don't bother reading.


And last, How can I hold Bush accountable for a war i think should be carried on. I'd contradict myself.

[ChumpDumper]

Why are you using Delays indictment?Because you brought it up.

And last, How can I hold Bush accountable for a war i think should be carried on. I'd contradict myself.And I said the Democrats who voted for the war for political purposes were complicit.

Bush is accountable either way.

[gtownspur]

Because you brought it up.

i Did bring Delay up,

but that's still weak knowingly trying to spin some one's words to up one for egotistical purposes.


Wouldn't you agree.

[ChumpDumper]

Not at all. I never would've said anything about Delay had you not brought him up. It was a weak analogy you made and it deserved to be exposed as such.

[gtownspur]

Not at all. I never would've said anything about Delay had you not brought him up. It was a weak analogy you made and it deserved to be exposed as such.


Here's the post, i'm referring to.


well, obviously you're still stuck on blaming bush for the whole thing.

There was a congressional debate over this, if the evidence was that flimsy as liberals claim, then it could have been avoided.

Heck, we've made Tom Delay step with weaker evidence.


Unless you're either pixel, mookie, or have a vendetta, there's no reason to try to twist my words dishonestly like you did.

Any reasonable person will find you trying to make me come across as saying that the weak evidence to bring down tom delay was the reason for democrats being suckered, will see right through it.

Your tactics are gutless.

[ChumpDumper]

Any reasonable person will find you trying to make me come across as saying that the weak evidence to bring down tom delay was the reason for democrats being suckeredNot at all. They'll see that your analogy doesn't hold up. You are comparing a grand jury in Travis County's (erroneously saying it was Congress) action to bring a charge against a sitting congressman to the US Congress' action to agree to the President's request to send young men and women to a foreign country to fight and die.

It was weak. There's no use complaining about having that pointed out to you.

[PixelPusher]

Unless you're either pixel, mookie, or have a vendetta, there's no reason to try to twist my words dishonestly like you did.

Are you referring to me? And if so, why?

[gtownspur]

Not at all. They'll see that your analogy doesn't hold up. You are comparing a grand jury in Travis County's action to bring a charge against a sitting congressman to the US Congress' action to agree to the President's request to send young men and women to a foreign country to fight and die.

It was weak. There's no use complaining about having that pointed out to you.


1.The grand jury did not make Delay step down, he was only indicted.

2. It was Congress who made Delay, not a grand jury, step down on weak evidence.


That analogy is simply stating that, It doesn't take much evidedenc for Congress to overrule or decide against one's favor.

It's that simple.

[gtownspur]

Are you referring to me? And if so, why?

Wow, i've notice a pattern of you coming to the aid of CD, at 12:00 on the west coast because CD is too cool to need it from you, and since he's clearly pwning me. :lol

[ChumpDumper]

Delay resigned.

So it's a baseless analogy.

[gtownspur]

Delay resigned.

So it's a baseless analogy.


You're right, before he was asked to step down.

[PixelPusher]

Wow, i've notice a pattern of you coming to the aid of CD, at 12:00 on the west coast because CD is too cool to need it from you, and since he's clearly pwning me. :lol
I do log on at midnight quite often, but I rarely need to "come to CD's aide".

[ChumpDumper]

You're right, before he was asked to step down.By whom? It's not like the Republicans were going to vote to remove him.

[gtownspur]

I do log on at midnight quite often, but I rarely need to "come to CD's aide".


THe irony, in you participating right now in this discussion. :lol

[gtownspur]

By whom? It's not like the Republicans were going to vote to remove him.


Why not?

He was a liability.

[PixelPusher]

THe irony, in you participating right now in this discussion. :lol
Why is it 90% of the people who use the term "irony" don't know what it means?

I posted a direct question to you, regarding me. That's not "coming to CD's aid".

[gtownspur]

Why is it 90% of the people who use the term "irony" don't know what it means?

I posted a direct question to you, regarding me. That's not "coming to CD's aid".


Look dip, it's quite evident that you always make an appearance when ever me and CD go at it, just look to the past threads and they'd indict you.


It's not ironic what you said, it's what you said in the previous post, and your occurrening appearances in mine and Chumps discussion.

[PixelPusher]

Look dip, it's quite evident that you always make an appearance when ever me and CD go at it, just look to the past threads and they'd indict you.


It's not ironic what you said, it's what you said in the previous post, and your occurrening appearances in mine and Chumps discussion.
Well, I looked through "MSNBC: US aisrstrikes target suspected AQ site in Somalia", "Rewarding punditry failure (and punishing success)" and reread this thread; all of which feature back-and-forths between you and CD (which are highly entertaining, hence the reason I log in to read them) and couldn't find a single instance where I "come to CD's aid", hence negating your assertion that I'm always joining in to defend him. If the few times in the past that I did join in bothers you so much, well...tough shit.

[ChumpDumper]

Why not?

He was a liability.I saw no report of their overtly abandoning him.

[exstatic]

I saw no report of their overtly abandoning him.
He was "abandonded" when the GOP changed House ethics committee rules to allow indicted Congresscritters to continue to serve, and when they replaced GOP members on said committee with more tractable ones after DeLay was admonished several times in one year, even though the GOP controlled the committee.