Reply With Quote
boy that was close one.. funny thing is saddam was more concered with Iran than he was with us..but hey we have sacrificed our honor, credibility, blood and treasure because Saddam wanted WMDs...
NBC News Reports Saddam Hussein Intended To Get Nuke After Sanctions Ended.
A somewhat stunning admission from NBC News. Of course, rational people have known this forever but, the media has been kind enough to protect the country from this sort of information.
Now, if we can get them to expose how the sanctions were crumbling under the weight of the Oil-For-Food scandal, the war will begin to make more sense. Of course, history will reveal much more about the Iraqi regime as time goes by and many of the nutters, as well as the Democrats that went from knowing Saddam Hussein was dangerous to accusing President Bush of lying us into a war, will be revealed to be the fools they are.
boy that was close one.. funny thing is saddam was more concered with Iran than he was with us..but hey we have sacrificed our honor, credibility, blood and treasure because Saddam wanted WMDs...
Or, history will show that this was didn't have to be fought..hopefull the MSM can expose the half truths and deliberate dishonesty this administration created in the run up to the war. ..
So far, history is going in the other direction.
Right-wingers continue to repeat the lies that dubya and head used to start the Iraq war, that right-wingers and dubya-suckers were suckered with, always trying to obscure the truth, that Iraq was exclusively an oil grab, and hide that the right-wing was suckered.
Saddam was no threat to anyone. Even if he had nukes, he didn't have the delivery vehicles to hit USA, and he knew damn well that Israel and USA would retaliate massively, destroying Iraq (except for the oil fields).
Same story with Iran. Their desire for nukes is a verbatim repeat of hhead's Iraq bull .
Even if Iran had nukes, Iran knows Israel and USA, maybe even France and UK, would retaliate massively.
M.A.D. worked for 45 years against Russia.
It has worked for decades between India and Pakistan.
M.A.D. will work against any other nuclear threats.
Iraq and Iran know from Nagasake and Hiroshima that the USA will "terroristically" murder 100's of 1000s, even millions of (non-white, non-Christian) civilians for military objectives.
Last edited by boutons_; 11-12-2007 at 10:30 PM.
I really don't think so. That's really self-deluding talk if you actually believe that. At this point, most analysts and historians have pegged the war as failure with much of the debate depending on how much of a failure (read: depends on exit strategy). The majority of the public has been steadfastly in that direction since post-2004 election. Although, the latter matters less because public perception runs orthogonal to truth in pure historical analysis.
"history is going in the other direction."
more right wing lies
the history of US-in-Iraq is a blatant disaster, with none of the bogus objectives, nor the oil objective achieved, or even within sight.
Why do you think dubya is reading about Truman? Because even a cretin like dubya knows the only way his legacy will escape from its current hole is if in the future, some (right-wing) revisionists re-write the history, esp to blame it on "public opinion", the lefties, the Dems, on ANYBODY except the Repugs themselves.
Really? Name an historian that has pegged this war as a failure.
Arguments over the rationale and legitimacy aside, this has been the best prosecuted, most humane, and least costly (in terms of U. S. casaulties) of any war we've ever fought.
Both regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq are out of power. Al Qaeda is losing big time in Iraq and has been hiding since September 11.
Is it over? No. But, if you think this war is going badly, you have absolutely no historical perspective on war and are, yourself, deluded.
You won't find an historian that has made any declaration on the success or failure of this war. If you do, they're not historians...because, this war isn't history yet.
Ooops indeed.
Saddam was no threat to the US in any way.
Poor bush was duped. his bad.
Poor Chump and GGA are the dupes. They still don't know how
to comprehend what they read.
I wasn't the one who committed our armed forces into a sectarian war ray. We relied on curve ball (who was lying), Chalabi (who turned out to be working with the Iran), and Saddam who was faking it..so yes your Bush was simply duped..even though his own intelligence agencies were telling him that Saddam wasn't the threat he was claiming..
I read where the Bush administration said Saddam was going to nuke us at any moment. The truth I just read above was he had no nukes, was at best a decade away from getting them and would have used them on our latest apparent existential threat instead of us.
By the way -- did Saddam say where the stockpiles of WMDs were?
Maybe he was faking it with the WMD too. Those kurds
all died of natural causes.
Saddam says he wanted us fooled. Not the first time our
intel has been fooled. I don't recall anyone, except maybe
a NYT plant, that said the Intel people said he didn't have
WMD. Even your idols Clinton, Kerry and Billary, along with
you overseas buddies, Germany and France said he had
WMD. Did you forget that?
so bush was duped... thanks for catching up ray...
Nice non-answer.
If this is all we got from Saddam, it simply proves how unnecessary this war was.
Maybe so, along with all your buddies, and you and I
and most of the world. How bout that little buddy.
Son, you would say it was unnecessary if the truth slapped
you in the face. "Discussing" anything with you is like
talking into the wind.
"best prosecuted "
yoni's is a blatant, shameless, ridiculous liar.
Down to 30K troops by Sep 03.
no post-invasion Plan B
not enough troops (like 2/3 too few)
not enough equipment (body armored, armored patrol vehicles?)
disbanding of Iraqi army + police
total corruption and failure of re-construction
etc, etc, etc.
"most humane,"
100s of 1000s of Iraqis killed, many of them innocent, directly as a result of Edgar and Charlie's bull invasion.
The truth is Saddam was no danger to the US. Slap yourself with that.
Last edited by ChumpDumper; 11-13-2007 at 04:12 PM.
no yoni and his blogs have only been wrong 4 times..
Last edited by George Gervin's Afro; 11-13-2007 at 04:05 PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
