IRAQ is On Track..

Falstaff · Jun 2, 2003, 06:46 AM

That Bush and Blair are on the side of peaceful muslims and there is no greater friend to them than the coalition partners...radical muslims are being marginalized in some countries even now..

~~bluelight~~ · Jun 2, 2003, 07:45 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by raid517
Well I don't always agree with everything blue says.... But some evidence on the ground would be a good start. Funnily enough Jeff the British Govenment are about to do exactly like you said. Their releasing a new dossier (having addmited forging the last one that provided much of the motivation for war) with all these reports and statistics and pointing to it as 'evidence' of WMDs. I dunno, maybe the paper is infected with smallpox or something. Maybe that will be what they mean by 'evidence'... I'm hedging my bets a bit, in a way I'm hopeful that WMDs will be found, as this will help patch things up in the Mid East and in the world at large. I think though if we're still here in another 4 months and nothing significant has still been found, it will be terribly emarrasing for everyone who supported the war and said the WMDs were definately there.

We shall see. The clock is ticking - and the whole world is watching.

Q

HI aid welcome back!

HereÂ´s a reply...full throttle noty aimed at you but at the UN haters and empire builders.

The clock has finished ticking over here.

They had proof.They had exact locations.

They have now admÃ*tted allthe way up to Rumsfeld and Wolfwitz:There seem to be no WMDÂ´s.

They have even said:Saddam probably got rid of them before the war and in that case long before the war (The WMDÂ´s for which they had proof "my remark")

Wolfwitz has stated that the WMD argument was necessary for building a coalition in the UN.

They were pissing on Blix and the UN for motnhs because of WMDÂ´s

They were pissing on France...

They were pissing on Germany....,

They were pissing on half the world....

With the wmd`s as their one and only argument and way to take the Iraq issue from the UN and
handle it themselves.

The WMDÂ´s were what they used to stab the UN inb the back and take over the process in Iraq themselves.

Now.....they control Iraq.

Iraq is today an American colony.

And some of them have the bleeding guts to say...."Oh we were misinformed by our intelligence"

Just as if anyone.....anyone should believe them?

Idiots.

Bluelight

Bluelight

merry · Jun 2, 2003, 09:26 AM

Welcome back Raid. Hope everythings fine

UberLord · Jun 2, 2003, 09:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by JavaFox
Let's sum up your argument. You are saying that the ONE company in ONE industry helped our economy recover in three weeks. WOW! What a difference Raytheon makes!

Sure, raytheon makes all the guns, planes, ammo, bombs, tanks, jeeps, clothing, boots, helmets, tents, cutlery, etc that was used in the war. So is was only three weeks? Reports I've heard stated that the US spent more on the war than a lot of countries make in a year!

This was an expensive war for America - but of course through your rose tinted specticals you don't see the benefit for the economy (and I never said it was going to save it - just trying to help and some of Dubya's close friends a little richer) as you wouldn't have put that subsidy option in your poll.

JavaFox · Jun 2, 2003, 12:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by UberLord
Sure, raytheon makes all the guns, planes, ammo, bombs, tanks, jeeps, clothing, boots, helmets, tents, cutlery, etc that was used in the war. So is was only three weeks? Reports I've heard stated that the US spent more on the war than a lot of countries make in a year!

So what, America is the world's biggest economic power -- of course stuff we do is going to cost more than what other countries make. We American spend as much on tort lawsuits as Sweden's entire economic output. What relevance is this to this debate? That because we spent a lot, it must have been a war for economic gain? That 's a huge leap in logic.

No businessman would have ever initiated Operation Iraqi Freedom as a means to make money. It is far too risky.

Falstaff · Jun 2, 2003, 01:07 PM

General Franks was ordered and instructed to use as few resources as possible to accomplish the invasion and the subsequent occupation of IRAQ. Donald Rumsfeld balked at the idea of a large scale invasion on the order of the first Gulf War, His gamble payed off this time...

raid517 · Jun 3, 2003, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by merry
Welcome back Raid. Hope everythings fine

Thanks mate. I'm good. I'm back for the moment perhaps. Mellowed a little maybe... As far as I can see it looks to me like blue just loves a good argument. Maybe that's why he wont let this bone go. Personally I'd rather wait and see. It would be good if something were found, as at least then I could be assured the whole world wasn't run on the basis of decite and lies. That wouldn't be a nice world at all to live in. At the end of the day I have just been unconvinced by all this. I'm sure it will upset blue if I say this... But if this really was about promoting peace and democracy, why not just do the whole of the Mid East? I could have gone with that. It just troubles me that they picked a relatively low threat target like Iraq - and when they did invade, they let the country go to rack and ruin, while only protecting the oil fields and the oil ministry.

I hated the Taliban when they destroyed the statues of the Buddhas at Bamiyan in Afaganistan. I don't see the allowing of the sacking of the Iraqi national museum to be any less ignorant an act. It is certainly clear where some people's priorities lie.

But who knows, maybe they will learn. Maybe this will become a consideration in future conflicts. Hopefully though, we will never have to find out.

But we''ll see how things go. We'll see how Blair's new evidence in his latest dossier is the evidence we have all been waiting for that WMDs existed, even though they can't actually point to anything on the ground.

Like I said I trully believe it is for the good of all the world if something is found. But if it is not, then those inviolved will be little more than con men.

I think I can guess what blue thinks about that....

Q

Falstaff · Jun 4, 2003, 01:36 AM

Saddam is gone, his killing fields are now being tended to, and his people weep now, for the legacy he left them, perhaps he has fled with his bilions somewhere.....or he is dead, but now his people might have a chance....

raid517 · Jun 4, 2003, 05:03 AM

Yes Jeff, but I still value the truth. The day we all agree that it is actually ok for our leaders to mislead us will be the day this world is lost. If this war had been about freeing the Iraqi people then fair enough, I think a lot more people could have been pursuaded by this argument. But this case was barely made. I cannot understand, nor fully accept how both our govenments were able to get things quite so badly wrong. It is only recently that the case has been made that, 'oh well, it doesn't matter, at least the Iraqi people are free now'. That was never the motivation we were given. In any case perhaps it will all come out in the wash. I don't know how independant these things are in the US, but I do know there will be an inquiry into how your govenment miscalculated so much. Will it be a whitewash? I don't know.... But if not I wouldn't be so cock sure that this administration has completely got away with this little adventure of theirs.... Personally I hope there are concequences. I trully do hope valuable leassons are learned. I still nonetheless hope that ultimately something will be found and some integrity and natural order in the world will finally be restored. As I have said, I do not want to live in a world made up of lies.

Q

Falstaff · Jun 4, 2003, 06:32 AM

What dismays me, is that Powell and Bush now have expressed reservations about the dubious content of the information, it was indeed channeled by the CIA from various sources, but those sources were never confirmed, and some of the data was terribly old, no doubt sitting in manila folders in gray sliding drawers for twelve years. I am actually familiar with the intelligence that existed 12 years ago, and my brother kept me aprised during his participation in the recent conflict, they still firmly believe that Saddam hid or destroy weapons in the desert, we are just finding the other skeletons in his closet even now, and we haven't even explored the underground bunker systems, that is going on now...while IRAQI's still continue to slip accross the border into Syria. I know this is contraindicative of the polcies that took us there, but just getting Saddam out of the way was reason enough for me to support the war. Yes agree, lessons will be learned for sure....funny you mentioned in Totalfinaelf in another thread...it is dirty french business, and I am afraid the British and the American oil companies also danced at the same party not too long ago...Oil is big, bigger than heroin, wouldn't you agree? ha ha...

raid517 · Jun 4, 2003, 08:40 AM

Well maybe its about a choice between expediency and principal. Personally I will take principal every time. If this was about 'liberating' the Iraq people, how come this was never pushed? They simply leapt on a September 11th bandwagon (they took advantage of it in my view) and went off on some crazy tangent in order to execute a plan that had been in the making for 7 years. I'm not big on conspiracy theories and if you even mention the word Jewish here JafaFox (or somebody) tends to jump on you and call you an anti-semite, but I do think this was about Israel wanting to secure her borders - I think also it was about oil - if only to the extent that a lot of people felt you couldn't leave a crazy guy in charge of the world's ecconomy. Also after Sepember the 11th America looked weak, so a demonstration of power was required to show the world (paticularly the Arab world) what would happen if you messed with America.
I guess we will have to just wait and see if this stategy has worked. If the palistinian situation is any indication, these Arabs don't give up so easily. I think the best hope there is though is the road map. I can't say I'm confident, but if that gets sorted, maybe there will be a real chance for peace in this world after all.

Q

JavaFox · Jun 4, 2003, 04:43 PM

Quote:

I'm not big on conspiracy theories and if you even mention the word Jewish here JafaFox (or somebody) tends to jump on you and call you an anti-semite, but I do think this was about Israel wanting to secure her borders -

Well, I am not going to touch on this for very long, as I have explained myself to death on this matter. Disagreeing with Israeli policies does not make one anti-semetic anymore than disagreeing with the US makes one anti-American. My use of the word was a) a condemnation of one-mindedness and b) to show that there is more than one type of anti-Semitism. I admit that my choice of that word is somewhat unfortunate -- the connotation of that word is much stronger than I meant it in that context. But, that said, I still feel that when one cannot help but critisize Israel and the Jews (and never ever gives that nation the benefit of the doubt) one is, plainly put, anti-Semetic. In other words, criticism is not wrong, but unbridled cynicism, negativity, and hostility is.

I think some of the reasons you think America went to war are true. It was partially a show of force, for one. And you are right about Israel, but I think you miss the big picture. Saddam was an unabashed and very public supporter of anti-Israeli terrorist groups. Yes, toppling him does indeed help safeguard Israel in a way, but in a larger sense, it also helps to promote peace. On the Palestinian side, The Roadmap mandates that they must curb violence and terrorism, and I am of the persuasion that terrorist groups, without some level of state-sponsorship, cannot exist.

With the fall of Iraq we have seen one such sponsor defeated. And that is one step in the right direction.

Falstaff · Jun 5, 2003, 04:31 AM

in politics...we support Israel, and are responsible in some measure for thier survival, but the arab world see's us as hypocrites, when G. Bush stood back and let some internal initiatives on the part of the Israeli's and Palestinians take hold. This business of politics is messy, but I believe that Bush is different from clinton and his predecessors, he has rejected the former member of the palestinain people and opened dialogue with his successor, perhaps a very smart move...

raid517 · Jun 5, 2003, 02:17 PM

Mmm JavaFox.... I'm not quite sure what your saying, are you calling me anti-semitic now? Well I've told you before how stupid I thought these kinds of accusations are, so unless you want me to repeat what I said about this before, perhaps you should keep your accusations to yourself. It apparently doesn't take much in your book to be anti anybody (or everybody, as the case may be). I am equally critical of both parties, I think the whole situation is nuts and both sides are totally crazy. Although on the bigger scale of things, all other considerations aside, I do feel bad that the Palistinans have had their land stolen from them and that they are slowly being squeezed out of their country. If I had been invaded and occupied, I'm sure I would fight, as I expect would anybody (including I supect you, if you are indeed the patriot you claim to be). And if it came to it - if there were were no other way - I would probably fight by any means possible.

On a side note Jeff I watched a show about "Operation Cyanide" last night, when Israel deliberately attacked the Liberty in 1967 an attempt to draw America into the war against Egypt. I woudn't go into the history of it, or the arguments for or against the view that it was a deliberate act of calculated murder, but the majority view from those who were there at that time (including the Captain) was that it was indeed deliberate. The attack lasted for over 2 hours, so plenty of time for the captain to radio back to HQ (which he did) that he was under attack and have LBJ find out what was going on and try to call a stop to it. Plenty of time too for the Israelis to notice the US flags and other markings on the ship. The planes and boats that attacked were also completely unmarked, so it seems there was a deliberate attempt to cover up who was launching the attack. 37 Americans lost their lives that day and many very important people, including the former chief of staff and head of the CIA all think the attack was deliberate and planned.

Personally I don't have a view. I am only recounting what I have read and heard. But how does that square with you? Or are you still too young to remember that?

Q

Falstaff · Jun 5, 2003, 02:31 PM

It was actually gathering intelligence, much like the USS Pueblo, it was sensitive and it was a target in my opinion, I personally think the military authority miscalculated the effect the attack would have...It was 1967 and Israel was honing it's premptive strike capability...If drastically effect the way the Israeli's respond to threats as well. Thw whole affair brought us closer if anything else...it is still offically an accident...but not the USS Pueblo..the N. Koreans enjoy displaying it as war bootie

JavaFox · Jun 5, 2003, 05:03 PM

Nowhere in my post did I call you anti-semetic, Raid. You really must learn to not be so paranoid. I don't really know why you would say "it apparently doesn't take much in your book to be anti anybody" when I posted a clear and concise paragraph detailing exactly what it takes for me to consider one anti-something. Did you read it?

raid517 · Jun 5, 2003, 05:11 PM

Well Jeff a lot of people forget that the 6 day war was indeed a pre-emptive strike. There is a falacy at this moment in time that Israel is a poor and opressed nation. Far from it. The truth is that almost every war Israel has been involved in (indeed I think it might very well be every war) Israel has been the perpetrator. (I was going to say agressor, but I'm sure that would upset JF, or someone else. Historical fact might be interprited as being anti-Jewish).

Anyhoo, the point was I think, that is if I had a point I can remember, that on the scale of conspiracy theories, this one comes with a lot of weight and disturbing detail behind it. Almost everyone who was involved (particularly on the American side) who is at least willing to talk about it, says they think it was deliberate. There's a good book somewhere about it I think... I can look it up for you if you want. Or just type "Operation Cyanide" into Google and you should find it.

I guess I'm harking back to what I said before about this war having a lot to do with Israel. Some people would write that off as a conspiracy theory too. But I think its perfectly reasonable, particularly given the key players in the whole afffair, many of whom have, or have had direct links with the Israeli govenment. If it happend before, if peoplle can be so decietful, I don't doubt they can be, or will be again.

Don't worry, though I don't think Jews are particularly mosre decietful than anyone else. Just so no one pipes in with their ' your a racist' comments again, just becuase i happend to mention the word Jew. There aren't enough (if any) Jews where I live, which tends to make it very hard to hate, or even dislike them.

Q

raid517 · Jun 5, 2003, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by JavaFox
Nowhere in my post did I call you anti-semetic, Raid. You really must learn to not be so paranoid. I don't really know why you would say "it apparently doesn't take much in your book to be anti anybody" when I posted a clear and concise paragraph detailing exactly what it takes for me to consider one anti-something. Did you read it?

No JF. sorry I didn't... Lol - haven't you learned by now that I just love winding you up?

Q

Jun 2, 2003, 06:46 AM	Thread Starter #61
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	But I still believe That Bush and Blair are on the side of peaceful muslims and there is no greater friend to them than the coalition partners...radical muslims are being marginalized in some countries even now.. __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Jun 2, 2003, 09:26 AM	#63
merry gargouille Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha Posts: 962 Rep Power: 0	Welcome back Raid. Hope everythings fine __________________ There is a war between the ones who say there is a war and the ones who say there isn't. ~~Leonard Cohen

Jun 2, 2003, 01:07 PM	Thread Starter #66
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	This time.. General Franks was ordered and instructed to use as few resources as possible to accomplish the invasion and the subsequent occupation of IRAQ. Donald Rumsfeld balked at the idea of a large scale invasion on the order of the first Gulf War, His gamble payed off this time... __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Jun 4, 2003, 01:36 AM	Thread Starter #68
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	WMD or no WMD Saddam is gone, his killing fields are now being tended to, and his people weep now, for the legacy he left them, perhaps he has fled with his bilions somewhere.....or he is dead, but now his people might have a chance.... __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Jun 4, 2003, 06:32 AM	Thread Starter #70
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	I detect a little altruistism What dismays me, is that Powell and Bush now have expressed reservations about the dubious content of the information, it was indeed channeled by the CIA from various sources, but those sources were never confirmed, and some of the data was terribly old, no doubt sitting in manila folders in gray sliding drawers for twelve years. I am actually familiar with the intelligence that existed 12 years ago, and my brother kept me aprised during his participation in the recent conflict, they still firmly believe that Saddam hid or destroy weapons in the desert, we are just finding the other skeletons in his closet even now, and we haven't even explored the underground bunker systems, that is going on now...while IRAQI's still continue to slip accross the border into Syria. I know this is contraindicative of the polcies that took us there, but just getting Saddam out of the way was reason enough for me to support the war. Yes agree, lessons will be learned for sure....funny you mentioned in Totalfinaelf in another thread...it is dirty french business, and I am afraid the British and the American oil companies also danced at the same party not too long ago...Oil is big, bigger than heroin, wouldn't you agree? ha ha... __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Jun 4, 2003, 05:03 AM	#69
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Yes Jeff, but I still value the truth. The day we all agree that it is actually ok for our leaders to mislead us will be the day this world is lost. If this war had been about freeing the Iraqi people then fair enough, I think a lot more people could have been pursuaded by this argument. But this case was barely made. I cannot understand, nor fully accept how both our govenments were able to get things quite so badly wrong. It is only recently that the case has been made that, 'oh well, it doesn't matter, at least the Iraqi people are free now'. That was never the motivation we were given. In any case perhaps it will all come out in the wash. I don't know how independant these things are in the US, but I do know there will be an inquiry into how your govenment miscalculated so much. Will it be a whitewash? I don't know.... But if not I wouldn't be so cock sure that this administration has completely got away with this little adventure of theirs.... Personally I hope there are concequences. I trully do hope valuable leassons are learned. I still nonetheless hope that ultimately something will be found and some integrity and natural order in the world will finally be restored. As I have said, I do not want to live in a world made up of lies. Q

Jun 4, 2003, 08:40 AM	#71
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Well maybe its about a choice between expediency and principal. Personally I will take principal every time. If this was about 'liberating' the Iraq people, how come this was never pushed? They simply leapt on a September 11th bandwagon (they took advantage of it in my view) and went off on some crazy tangent in order to execute a plan that had been in the making for 7 years. I'm not big on conspiracy theories and if you even mention the word Jewish here JafaFox (or somebody) tends to jump on you and call you an anti-semite, but I do think this was about Israel wanting to secure her borders - I think also it was about oil - if only to the extent that a lot of people felt you couldn't leave a crazy guy in charge of the world's ecconomy. Also after Sepember the 11th America looked weak, so a demonstration of power was required to show the world (paticularly the Arab world) what would happen if you messed with America. I guess we will have to just wait and see if this stategy has worked. If the palistinian situation is any indication, these Arabs don't give up so easily. I think the best hope there is though is the road map. I can't say I'm confident, but if that gets sorted, maybe there will be a real chance for peace in this world after all. Q

Jun 5, 2003, 04:31 AM	Thread Starter #73
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	There is some inherent hypocracy in politics...we support Israel, and are responsible in some measure for thier survival, but the arab world see's us as hypocrites, when G. Bush stood back and let some internal initiatives on the part of the Israeli's and Palestinians take hold. This business of politics is messy, but I believe that Bush is different from clinton and his predecessors, he has rejected the former member of the palestinain people and opened dialogue with his successor, perhaps a very smart move... __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Jun 5, 2003, 02:17 PM	#74
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Mmm JavaFox.... I'm not quite sure what your saying, are you calling me anti-semitic now? Well I've told you before how stupid I thought these kinds of accusations are, so unless you want me to repeat what I said about this before, perhaps you should keep your accusations to yourself. It apparently doesn't take much in your book to be anti anybody (or everybody, as the case may be). I am equally critical of both parties, I think the whole situation is nuts and both sides are totally crazy. Although on the bigger scale of things, all other considerations aside, I do feel bad that the Palistinans have had their land stolen from them and that they are slowly being squeezed out of their country. If I had been invaded and occupied, I'm sure I would fight, as I expect would anybody (including I supect you, if you are indeed the patriot you claim to be). And if it came to it - if there were were no other way - I would probably fight by any means possible. On a side note Jeff I watched a show about "Operation Cyanide" last night, when Israel deliberately attacked the Liberty in 1967 an attempt to draw America into the war against Egypt. I woudn't go into the history of it, or the arguments for or against the view that it was a deliberate act of calculated murder, but the majority view from those who were there at that time (including the Captain) was that it was indeed deliberate. The attack lasted for over 2 hours, so plenty of time for the captain to radio back to HQ (which he did) that he was under attack and have LBJ find out what was going on and try to call a stop to it. Plenty of time too for the Israelis to notice the US flags and other markings on the ship. The planes and boats that attacked were also completely unmarked, so it seems there was a deliberate attempt to cover up who was launching the attack. 37 Americans lost their lives that day and many very important people, including the former chief of staff and head of the CIA all think the attack was deliberate and planned. Personally I don't have a view. I am only recounting what I have read and heard. But how does that square with you? Or are you still too young to remember that? Q Last edited by raid517; Jun 5, 2003 at 04:48 PM.

Jun 5, 2003, 02:31 PM	Thread Starter #75
Falstaff Old Codger Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: USAFA Posts: 19,048 Rep Power: 207	Funny you should mention the Liberty. It was actually gathering intelligence, much like the USS Pueblo, it was sensitive and it was a target in my opinion, I personally think the military authority miscalculated the effect the attack would have...It was 1967 and Israel was honing it's premptive strike capability...If drastically effect the way the Israeli's respond to threats as well. Thw whole affair brought us closer if anything else...it is still offically an accident...but not the USS Pueblo..the N. Koreans enjoy displaying it as war bootie __________________ "Inspiration is always a surprising visitor."

Jun 5, 2003, 05:03 PM	#76
JavaFox E Pluribus Unum Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 3,203 Rep Power: 0	Nowhere in my post did I call you anti-semetic, Raid. You really must learn to not be so paranoid. I don't really know why you would say "it apparently doesn't take much in your book to be anti anybody" when I posted a clear and concise paragraph detailing exactly what it takes for me to consider one anti-something. Did you read it?

Jun 5, 2003, 05:11 PM	#77
raid517 DriverHeaven Senior Member Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 2,518 Rep Power: 0	Well Jeff a lot of people forget that the 6 day war was indeed a pre-emptive strike. There is a falacy at this moment in time that Israel is a poor and opressed nation. Far from it. The truth is that almost every war Israel has been involved in (indeed I think it might very well be every war) Israel has been the perpetrator. (I was going to say agressor, but I'm sure that would upset JF, or someone else. Historical fact might be interprited as being anti-Jewish). Anyhoo, the point was I think, that is if I had a point I can remember, that on the scale of conspiracy theories, this one comes with a lot of weight and disturbing detail behind it. Almost everyone who was involved (particularly on the American side) who is at least willing to talk about it, says they think it was deliberate. There's a good book somewhere about it I think... I can look it up for you if you want. Or just type "Operation Cyanide" into Google and you should find it. I guess I'm harking back to what I said before about this war having a lot to do with Israel. Some people would write that off as a conspiracy theory too. But I think its perfectly reasonable, particularly given the key players in the whole afffair, many of whom have, or have had direct links with the Israeli govenment. If it happend before, if peoplle can be so decietful, I don't doubt they can be, or will be again. Don't worry, though I don't think Jews are particularly mosre decietful than anyone else. Just so no one pipes in with their ' your a racist' comments again, just becuase i happend to mention the word Jew. There aren't enough (if any) Jews where I live, which tends to make it very hard to hate, or even dislike them. Q Last edited by raid517; Jun 5, 2003 at 08:56 PM.