Question about Iraq..

[Goobieman]

Just what was I wrong about? I said 1441 was not in HR114. A true statement? I asked why it wasn't in 1441? Just a question. At the time I asked that question, I did not know that HR114 was issued a month before 1441 was. How is that a lie?

Yadda yadda yadda.

You're every bit a liar as you claim Bush to be.
You're just too partisan and too bigoted to admit it.

YOU said:

It is interesting to note that one of the main reasons people use to argue the invasion of Iraq was legal, was UNSC Resolution 1441. It is even more interesting to note that in our own Resolution H.R. 114, in which Congress stated the reasons for authorization to the executive branch to use military action, and which they listed in 114 all the pertanant UN Resolutions, 1441 was NOT included in the document.

There's no questions in that statement - they are all declaratives.
A declarative based on incomplete or bad information.
Just like the administration;s claims regarding WMDs.
He lied, you lied. That simple.

Bush new it was not true, but went ahead with it anyway.

So you have said, and yet never been able to show.

By the way, do not confuse that analogy with my contention that the US received authorization from the UN, because they did not. HR114 did not justify the attack.

HR114 was a defacto declaration of war.
Its all the "justification" Bush needed.
See, The President of the US answers to the people of the US and, to some degree, Congress.
Not the UN.
So, it doesnt matter if YOU think the UN didnt OK it -- because, in fact, the UN doesnt NEED to OK it.

 

[ProudAmerican]

That invasion was not only illegal according to International Law, it has completely destroyed US credibility throughout the world. We attacked a country that did nothing to us.

I dont reacall afghanistan doing anything to us either.

Doesn't anyone see just how wrong that is? By attacking Iraq, we have de-stabilized the entire world.

nonsense.

Now Russia is talking about arming up. They signed a defense pact with China. You can't tell me that we weren't the driving force behind that.

they werent our friends before the iraq invasion.

In addition, according to DSM (which no one in the Adminstration has questioned its authenticity), Bush new Iraq didn't have the weapons and he knew they weren't a threat, but he had it in his mind to attack. So he did. Which resulted in the UN inspectors work being pre-empted before their mission was completed.

more opinion. opinions are great, but they prove absolutely nothing.

 

[Tashah]

That invasion was not only illegal according to International Law, it has completely destroyed US credibility throughout the world. We attacked a country that did nothing to us. Doesn't anyone see just how wrong that is? By attacking Iraq, we have de-stabilized the entire world. Now Russia is talking about arming up. They signed a defense pact with China. You can't tell me that we weren't the driving force behind that.

In addition, according to DSM (which no one in the Adminstration has questioned its authenticity), Bush new Iraq didn't have the weapons and he knew they weren't a threat, but he had it in his mind to attack. So he did. Which resulted in the UN inspectors work being pre-empted before their mission was completed.

If we did things your way Billo, nothing would get done. Osama would still be in Kandhar sipping sweet tea with Mullah Omar. You always give me the distinct impression that you would rather see a murderer escape if capturing him necessitated jaywalking. Thank G-d for the doers of the world.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Tashah:
If we did things your way Billo, nothing would get done. Osama would still be in Kandhar sipping sweet tea with Mullah Omar. You always give me the distinct impression that you would rather see a murderer escape if capturing him necessitated jaywalking. Thank G-d for the doers of the world.

I call a spade, a spade. I don't call it a heart, diamond or club. When I see right, I say, "That is right." When I see wrong, I say, "That is wrong". What I don't see, is the double-standard many people try to think they can live their lives by. In my world, the door swings both ways. I'm not going to live by a different set of standards as anyone else.

I'm not going to quote Amnesty International when I want to demonize other countries for human rights abuses. Then demonize Amnesty International when the speak out against human rights abuses by my country. Human rights abuse is wrong! And it is wrong for anyone doing the abusing. Whether it is al Qaeda, or the US of A. It is still wrong!

By the way, if I was President and knew where UBL was, I certainly would not have used a bunch of street thugs like the Northern Alliance to go get him. I would have sent in Delta Force to snatch his terrorist a.s.s. Then he would be here in this country in an orange jumpsuit for the world to see, getting two hots a day for the rest of his life. At that point, he would not be a leader, nor a martyr, but a bitch. A jail-house bitch! If I had my way, that would be his future.

In answer to your analogy, no, I don't give the death penalty for parking violations. But I have received that from time to time.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally Posted by ProudAmerican
I dont reacall afghanistan doing anything to us either.

You are right. We should not have attacked them either.

Originally Posted by ProudAmerican
nonsense.

Don't you listen to world opinion. What am I talking about. You don't listen to anything. What was I thinking.

Originally Posted by ProudAmerican
they werent our friends before the iraq invasion.

Bush calls Putin a friend. Putin calls Bush a hypocrit. Do you understand the concept of "hypocrisy?"

Originally Posted by ProudAmerican
more opinion. opinions are great, but they prove absolutely nothing.

It's not just an opinion, it's a fact that Bush said he was going to fix the intel to attack Iraq, and he did. He did attack Iraq, didn't he?

 

[Tashah]

By the way, if I was President and knew where UBL was, I certainly would not have used a bunch of street thugs like the Northern Alliance to go get him. I would have sent in Delta Force to snatch his terrorist a.s.s.

Lol. Who are you kidding? You wouldn't have done any such thing President Billo. You would have found some Clintonesqué excuse to do nothing. Kidnapping? Overflight permissions? Miranda rights? Has the ACLU approved? What about the French? The UN? The Hague? Amnesty International?

Delusions of grandéur Billo. You have self-castrated yourself. Your very complaints and arguments on this site render you an impotent CIC.

 

[ProudAmerican]

By the way, if I was President and knew where UBL was, I certainly would not have used a bunch of street thugs like the Northern Alliance to go get him. I would have sent in Delta Force to snatch his terrorist a.s.s.

You are right. We should not have attacked them either.

LMAO....and you want to preach about hypocrisy?

how could you have possibly found a terrorist in a country you think we shouldnt be in???

we all know how tough liberals are on terrorists.

 

[alphamale]

Delusions of grandéur Billo. You have self-castrated yourself. Your very complaints and arguments on this site render you an impotent CIC.

Wow, that was really a not nice thing to say to Billo. You should apologize and be nice to him from now on.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Tashah:
Lol. Who are you kidding? You wouldn't have done any such thing President Billo. You would have found some Clintonesqué excuse to do nothing. Kidnapping? Overflight permissions? Miranda rights? Has the ACLU approved? What about the French? The UN? The Hague? Amnesty International?

Delusions of grandéur Billo. You have self-castrated yourself. Your very complaints and arguments on this site render you an impotent CIC.

Tashah! Wake up! Your dreaming again!

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by alphamale
Wow, that was really a not nice thing to say to Billo. You should apologize and be nice to him from now on.

One thing I do hate, is people shaking my hand with the one hand, and stabbing me in the back with the other.

I get really mean when that occurs.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by ProudAmerican:
LMAO....and you want to preach about hypocrisy?

how could you have possibly found a terrorist in a country you think we shouldnt be in???

we all know how tough liberals are on terrorists.

UBL (like the Iran situation), is one of those issues that I don't mind being a little hypocritical about. Yeah, I'd bag that asshole in a heartbeat! Because, unlike Bush, I'm not a *****!

 

[Goobieman]

Tashah! Wake up! Your dreaming again!

That's "you're".

What the matter, Billo -- don't like it when you fall victim to your own arguments?

 

[MSgt]

Lol. Who are you kidding? You wouldn't have done any such thing President Billo. You would have found some Clintonesqué excuse to do nothing. Kidnapping? Overflight permissions? Miranda rights? Has the ACLU approved? What about the French? The UN? The Hague? Amnesty International?

Delusions of grandéur Billo. You have self-castrated yourself. Your very complaints and arguments on this site render you an impotent CIC.

OOOOOHHHHHH...SNAP!!!!

 

[Tashah]

One thing I do hate, is people shaking my hand with the one hand, and stabbing me in the back with the other.

I get really mean when that occurs.

Fair enough... but I have been a consistent hawk on the war against Islamist terrorism and always will be. Don't put the onus on me. You stabbed yourself in the groin with your imaginary presidential directive hypocracy. I merely pointed out that your musing is diametrically opposed to your well established and voluminous stance here at DP. Get mean with me all you want but to borrow your own phraseology, I also call a spade a spade.

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Tashah:
Fair enough... but I have been a consistent hawk on the war against Islamist terrorism and always will be. Don't put the onus on me. You stabbed yourself in the groin with your imaginary presidential directive hypocracy. I merely pointed out that your musing is diametrically opposed to your well established and voluminous stance here at DP. Get mean with me all you want but to borrow your own phraseology, I also call a spade a spade.

First off, that statement of mine was in reference to alphamale who has made a complete 180 in the tome of his posts. So much so, that I'm wondering if these nice new words are being said with any sincerity. So, the jury is still out on that one.

As for you, I never let anyone tell me how I think. Yes, it would be hypocritical of me (if President) to go after UBL. So the defendent pleads guilty. But I wouldn't do it in front of the hole world. All they would know was somebody got kidnapped. Somebody big. Then back in this country I would make the announcement, take the heat and move on. As armchair quarterbacks, we are allowed a little creativity. But to put this in perspective, all that is is a hypothetical meant to make the point that when Bush knew where that guy was, he did not exhaust all necessary means to go get him. That was the issue. Not me.

But there are bigger issues to be dealing with than this. You say you're a hawk. Well, the only thing you hawks have left as a reason for going into Iraq is "faulty intelligence". Saying they "knew" where they were, was a lie. Saying were their as liberators, is a joke. But saying we had to act right away because of an immenant threat to our country, which result in the deaths of thousands of individuals, and made this country the most hated country on earth, which has now increased the threat of another terrorist attack, is "TREASON!"

Back to hypocrisy for one brief moment. Right now, he that Iran guy doesn't shut his mouth, I can't say I would be against us doing something there that wasn't entirely diplomatic. So, if you desire, can take shots at me on this one. Because I won't be protesting an invasion on Iran, as hypocritical as that sounds.

One more thing...

We need to remember that we are using the US military to prosecute this War on Terror. However, it is due to our military intervention throughout the world, which has played a role in the creation of these terrorists. You can see a direct link between the areas we have gone into and the rise of terrorism against America or Americans in those areas. With that in mind, by going into Iraq, we are proliferating terrorism.

Think about that...

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by GySgt:
OOOOOHHHHHH...SNAP!!!!

It's more like a "rim shot".

 

[Billo_Really]

Originally posted by Goobieman:
That's "you're".

What the matter, Billo -- don't like it when you fall victim to your own arguments?

I haven't fallen at all. You're confused.

 

[Tashah]

Since you didn't provide either a citation or a quote username, I'll assume that these are your words and thoughts...

One more thing...

We need to remember that we are using the US military to prosecute this War on Terror. However, it is due to our military intervention throughout the world, which has played a role in the creation of these terrorists. You can see a direct link between the areas we have gone into and the rise of terrorism against America or Americans in those areas. With that in mind, by going into Iraq, we are proliferating terrorism.

Think about that...

Firstly, we are using the military to prosecute the WoT because we are at war and previous law enforcement efforts just didn't cut it.

Secondly, the terrorists existed long before we intervened militarily. To imply that military intervention is responsible for terrorism is akin to blaming bank guards for the existence of bank robbers. Terrorists gravitate to theaters of operation because that's where all the action is. It is in the interest of the US and the military to kill the jihadists on foreign soil rather than rely on the timid FBI to hunt them down between our shores.

Thirdly, there has been no Islamist terrorist attack in America since US forces took the battle to the very heart of the enemy.

Lastly... Engaging in battle with the enemy is proliferating terrorism? That is like saying community policing proliferates gang activity. Come on Billo.

Your arguments here are simplistic and disingenuous. To my mind, anyone who misinterprets and twists the WoT to suit their political/ideological agenda does a great disservice to the security to the United States and the freedom loving nations of the international community. This is not a popularity contest Billo, this is war. If I have any criticism of the WoT, it is simply my belief that the United States continues to use half-measures to placate the vagarities of domestic and international political correctness. Think about that.

 

[Goobieman]

I haven't fallen at all. You're confused.

And, according to your argument, you're a liar.

But hey - at least you're in good company w/ GWB and WJC -- right?

 

[MSgt]

One more thing...

We need to remember that we are using the US military to prosecute this War on Terror. However, it is due to our military intervention throughout the world, which has played a role in the creation of these terrorists. You can see a direct link between the areas we have gone into and the rise of terrorism against America or Americans in those areas. With that in mind, by going into Iraq, we are proliferating terrorism.

Think about that...

----------------------------------------

Billo, why am I not surpised that you continue to get things all wrong?


The cancer of Radical Islam grows where socio-economic conditions are poor; governments are repressive and unable to provide essential social services, such as providing adequate oversight of their educational system….or have allowed / sanctioned Radical Islamic curricula. Radical Islam get's it's roots form the Muslim Brotherhood, which was created in 1929 in Egypt.

There is two other commonalities amongst nations that breed terrorists - the subjucation of women and a governing single dogmatic religion. In any civilization where these two are evident, you will find domineering men who use their religion to oppress and to nurture fundamentalism (which when mixed with the above paragraph will always result in Radicalism that can take the form of terrorism).

The reason you will find our military in these areas, is that it is in these areas where we find our enemies. People who are angry at the loss of personal opportunities and face the complete absence of a future. The governments of these people use us as a scapegoat. They born into a fabricated hate that is misdirected. We did not ruin their civilizations. Their culture did this as the rest of the world progressed. We do business with governments - we do not tell them how to govern their people. I find it horribly and tragically ironic how some people whine that we should not tell "sovereign" governments how to rule their people, yet blame us for how our business partners (other governments) treat their people.

It has nothing to do with "our military intervention throughout the world." This is pathetic and is sophomoric nonesense. Maybe we should take all the blame for Pearl Harbor by blaming it on our nuking of Japan. It's much of the same twisted logic. The "direct link" is due to our involvement as a super power to referee the world. Without our involvement here and there, the death and carnage in this world would be astronomical. WWIII is going to happen no matter what we do. It is very obvious, and has been obvious for almost 20 years, where it is going to take place. Anything we can do now to ease that inevitable conflict is worth doing.

- Saddam was a militant asshole.
- Iran is seeking the nuke
- Palestinian Radicals (urged on by Arabs and Persians elsewhere) are more interested in destroying Israel (our ally, whether people like it or not) rather than finding a peaceful co-existence.
- The "House of Saud" is more concerned with lining their pockets with oil money than treating their civilization with respect and with the basic human decancies that allow a society to thrive.
- Syria is the Saddam Regime Lite.

Their hatred towards us has absolutely no credibility. It is mired in racism and bigotry towards "Zions" and anyone that prevents them from acting on that passed down self-destructive sentiment. We do, what the UN should. This is not about individual Muslim states. We did not tell the Shaw to neglect his people. We did not tell Khomeini to brutalize Islam (something Iranians are paying for now). We did not tell the Saudi elite to oppress and abuse their people. We did not create the Baathist Party. We did not tell them to govern their people through a twisted version of Islam for the sake of organizationn and control. This is all of their doing and we are their scapegoat. This is about a failing region and a self-destructive culture.

How long do you think the lid is going to be contained on this? Why don't you think about that instead of running off nonesense that has no foundation of what has happened.

 

[Davo The Mavo]

I find it absolutely amazing how many people who support the fiasco in Iraq, also have the ability to revise history at a a whim. It is remarkable how even the Present Time can be revised to fit the spin that reinforces support for the stupidity displayed. ANY mistake or MISTAKES brought forward to be examined cannot and will not be addressed based on the claim that if these mistakes are brought up, the person bringing them up is a Partisan hack or Left wing Wacko-----therefore, those mistakes need not be addressed.

Point out the past claims of success, progress, and decreases in violence, AND despite evidence to the contrary, critical thinkers are told "It Never happened that way." If that is not an acceptable retort, then the Semantic Argument of what the Administration and the President REALLY meant to say is next in the long line of apologist excuses.
They couldn't have "imagined" planes being used as Missiles.
They could not imagine the Iraqis would NOT greet us with Flowers, Kisses, and Hugs, so, Who Needs Contingency Plan for an Insurgency!!!!

Semantics are the War Supporter's best friend. It's a war of Attrition-----It's gonna take a long time. It was gonna happen eventually.

Rummyhead: April 28th 2003. The one thing we do know is that we’re going to be able to reduce the size of our forces, obviously, for a couple of reasons. One because, a few reasons, one is because the Operation Northern and Southern Watches are over and not necessary anymore, so those capabilities can be moved. Second is that the forces that were necessary to liberate Iraq are not necessary during the stabilization period, and as we move into that we ought to be able to make adjustments. And third, Iraq was a threat in the region, and because that threat will be gone, we also have the ability to adjust some of our arrangements. So we have good friends and allies here in the region; we’ve had long running multiple-decade relationships; and we intend to maintain those relationships.

Yep, this sure indicates he thought it was gonna be a long hard slog before it actually turned into one. Yep, and it was never implied this war was just about ready for the history books. Where do those Left Wing Partisan Hacks get the impression it was gonna be only a few deadenders to deal with? Oops, past mistake, I must be being Partisan again. Not allowed to bring them up. Alas, I leave the George W. Fanatic to their googling.

Funny thing, on April 29th, 2003, Rummyhead's exit strategy kind of changed. From that day forward, "Success" became the exit strategy. I am sure when all The George Bush, War in Iraq fanatics were listening to the Administration claim that it was a few Holdouts, Thugs, assassins, and deadenders to deal with way back when-----they were all jumping up and down saying "Hey George, you are wrong, this is gonna be the Central Front of the War on Terror, ahhhhhh, errrrr, even though we are there for Human Rights."

I was mentioning to Cappy the other day, that in my life experience, it is right around 25-30% of the people I have worked with both as a civilian and in the military, love to blame others and always have an excuse for why they didn't cause the problem. Many time these same people are people who are saddled behind a desk or computer all day and never have to get their feet dirty. These people tend to act like they know the deal, but it is sometimes dangerous for a person to have a little knowledge. We called these people REMF's when I was in the Military, and in civilian life, we just acknowledged that they were what is wrong with America right now.

 

[Iriemon]

... This is not a popularity contest Billo, this is war. If I have any criticism of the WoT, it is simply my belief that the United States continues to use half-measures to placate the vagarities of domestic and international political correctness. Think about that.

Explain please. What would be "full measures"?

 

[easyt65]

Truly, when George Bush stated that nations like Germany, France, and Russia (Free market Companies from those Nations) could not share in the spoils (Contracts for privatizing the military) of the Iraqi War, our image and reputation meant nothing. Our image has been tarnished.....

Germany France, and Russia had already proffitted from the Black Marketing during the 12 years sanctions were SUPPOSED to have been in place! Evidence has already been found to prove French President Jacques Chirac personally made millions in the Black Marketing and oil-for-Food Scandal.

Also, both France and Russia were busy making millions just days before and IN the earkly days of the war selling military weapons and SERVICES to Hussein designed to counter the United states Military! Russia, for instance, not only SOLD GPS jammers designed to defeat one and only one military in the world - US - to Hussein, their soldiers also maintained/ran them! Because of this, we had to send in Special Forces teams to take out key targets instead of being able to use missiles - as a result, Americans died needlessly. Bush, armed with the evidence, finally warned Putin that we would start carper-bombing if necessary and that we would not worry about any of their troops on the ground! Whether he was serious or not, Putin believed him and pulled his troops out! So, as evidence shows, these goverments were profiteering, especially during the war, and assisting a murderous duictatior who was rapin, torturing, murdering, and gassing his own people.

So pardon me for not being concerned because our reputation among enemies, liars, thieves, and supporters of tyranical dictators has been diminished!

 

[MSgt]

I find it absolutely amazing how many people who support the fiasco in Iraq, also have the ability to revise history at a a whim. It is remarkable how even the Present Time can be revised to fit the spin that reinforces support for the stupidity displayed. ANY mistake or MISTAKES brought forward to be examined cannot and will not be addressed based on the claim that if these mistakes are brought up, the person bringing them up is a Partisan hack or Left wing Wacko-----therefore, those mistakes need not be addressed.

Point out the past claims of success, progress, and decreases in violence, AND despite evidence to the contrary, critical thinkers are told "It Never happened that way." If that is not an acceptable retort, then the Semantic Argument of what the Administration and the President REALLY meant to say is next in the long line of apologist excuses.
They couldn't have "imagined" planes being used as Missiles.
They could not imagine the Iraqis would NOT greet us with Flowers, Kisses, and Hugs, so, Who Needs Contingency Plan for an Insurgency!!!!

Semantics are the War Supporter's best friend. It's a war of Attrition-----It's gonna take a long time. It was gonna happen eventually.



Yep, this sure indicates he thought it was gonna be a long hard slog before it actually turned into one. Yep, and it was never implied this war was just about ready for the history books. Where do those Left Wing Partisan Hacks get the impression it was gonna be only a few deadenders to deal with? Oops, past mistake, I must be being Partisan again. Not allowed to bring them up. Alas, I leave the George W. Fanatic to their googling.

Funny thing, on April 29th, 2003, Rummyhead's exit strategy kind of changed. From that day forward, "Success" became the exit strategy. I am sure when all The George Bush, War in Iraq fanatics were listening to the Administration claim that it was a few Holdouts, Thugs, assassins, and deadenders to deal with way back when-----they were all jumping up and down saying "Hey George, you are wrong, this is gonna be the Central Front of the War on Terror, ahhhhhh, errrrr, even though we are there for Human Rights."

I was mentioning to Cappy the other day, that in my life experience, it is right around 25-30% of the people I have worked with both as a civilian and in the military, love to blame others and always have an excuse for why they didn't cause the problem. Many time these same people are people who are saddled behind a desk or computer all day and never have to get their feet dirty. These people tend to act like they know the deal, but it is sometimes dangerous for a person to have a little knowledge. We called these people REMF's when I was in the Military, and in civilian life, we just acknowledged that they were what is wrong with America right now.

I love the "Bush apologists" part. A sure sign of a lack of vision, the adherence to BS politics above all, and too much opinion based on headlines. Whining about the typical *** coverings of politicians will not change the fact of the reality we face. Nor will calling on your vast experience in one war that had nothing to do with Radical Islam give you insight into what study can easily provide.

Fact - We just wanted to get rid of Saddam and to set up a government of the people.
Fact - The administration ignored the warnings of a Radical insurgency and we payed for it.
Fact - Iraq became the front on this "War on Terror," because most of the insurgency are Radicals that are fighting their "God's" war. Now we are obligated to finish this.
Fact - Iraq is not the only location where our troops are deployed in this "War on Terror."
Fact - Americans and the world is still learning what exactly a "War on terror" means - this also means our dopey politicians.

Any other whines and exhaustive complaints being paraded around where politicians have tripped all over themselves is pointless. It does not change the facts of the reality and what we can achieve for our security regarding the entire region if Iraqis are successful.

In my opinion, the lack of knowldege and study that so many individuals display, yet declare wisdom, is exactly what is wrong with America ALWAYS.

 

[Iriemon]

I love the "Bush apologists" part. A sure sign of a lack of vision, the adherence to BS politics above all, and too much opinion based on headlines. Whining about the typical *** coverings of politicians will not change the fact of the reality we face. Nor will calling on your vast experience in one war that had nothing to do with Radical Islam give you insight into what study can easily provide.

Fact - We just wanted to get rid of Saddam and to set up a government of the people.
Fact - The administration ignored the warnings of a Radical insurgency and we payed for it.
Fact - Iraq became the front on this "War on Terror," because most of the insurgency are Radicals that are fighting their "God's" war. Now we are obligated to finish this.
Fact - Iraq is not the only location where our troops are deployed in this "War on Terror."
Fact - Americans and the world is still learning what exactly a "War on terror" means - this also means our dopey politicians.

Any other whines and exhaustive complaints being paraded around where politicians have tripped all over themselves is pointless. It does not change the facts of the reality and what we can achieve for our security regarding the entire region if Iraqis are successful.

In my opinion, the lack of knowldege and study that so many individuals display, yet declare wisdom, is exactly what is wrong with America ALWAYS.

This post being a prime example.

"Fact - We just wanted to get rid of Saddam and to set up a government of the people."

Sure. Had nothing to do with "weapons of mass destrction" and urgent threats. That's just liberal revisionist history.

Four legs good; two legs better.