No ties to Al-Qaeda. No weapons of mass destruction. No danger to U.S. security.
Quoted from (full article here...)
http://www.workingforchange.com/arti...m?ItemID=16212
"The peace movement was right -- and still is -- about Iraq.
The fact that the Bush Administration was lying about virtually every justification for invading Iraq was something any inquiring reporter could have exposed months before, not after, the invasion began. No ties to Al-Qaeda. No weapons of mass destruction. No danger to U.S. security. Dated, wildly exaggerated, or simply forged ?intelligence.? An invasion that was illegal under any and every conceivable legal authority. And peaceniks have continued to be right: the anonymous (and, in the U.S., almost entirely unreported) death of thousands of Iraqi civilians. Many thousands more, including U.S. soldiers, will die from the radioactive munitions. And now the country?s being looted by the same bullies who overran it. Saddam isn?t the only government leader who deserves to stand trial."
Now, read this...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...questid=120459
"...The manifesto, presented as a "manual for victory" in the war on terror, also calls for Saudi Arabia and France to be treated not as allies but as rivals and possibly enemies..."
"...The book calls for tough action against France and its dreams of offsetting US power. "We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington," it states. Britain's independence from Europe should be preserved, perhaps with open access for British arms to American defence markets."
----------------------------------------------
- We do not understand here in Europe (especially in France) what's going on in the US. Can someone explain how we got there ?
http://www.workingforchange.com/arti...m?ItemID=16212
"The peace movement was right -- and still is -- about Iraq.
The fact that the Bush Administration was lying about virtually every justification for invading Iraq was something any inquiring reporter could have exposed months before, not after, the invasion began. No ties to Al-Qaeda. No weapons of mass destruction. No danger to U.S. security. Dated, wildly exaggerated, or simply forged ?intelligence.? An invasion that was illegal under any and every conceivable legal authority. And peaceniks have continued to be right: the anonymous (and, in the U.S., almost entirely unreported) death of thousands of Iraqi civilians. Many thousands more, including U.S. soldiers, will die from the radioactive munitions. And now the country?s being looted by the same bullies who overran it. Saddam isn?t the only government leader who deserves to stand trial."
Now, read this...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...questid=120459
"...The manifesto, presented as a "manual for victory" in the war on terror, also calls for Saudi Arabia and France to be treated not as allies but as rivals and possibly enemies..."
"...The book calls for tough action against France and its dreams of offsetting US power. "We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington," it states. Britain's independence from Europe should be preserved, perhaps with open access for British arms to American defence markets."
----------------------------------------------
- We do not understand here in Europe (especially in France) what's going on in the US. Can someone explain how we got there ?
Comments
Basically, you got in our way.
Originally posted by pierr_alex
"The peace movement was right -- and still is -- about Iraq.
The fact that the Bush Administration was lying about virtually every justification for invading Iraq was something any inquiring reporter could have exposed months before"
"...The manifesto, presented as a "manual for victory" in the war on terror, also calls for Saudi Arabia and France to be treated not as allies but as rivals and possibly enemies..."
"...The book calls for tough action
1 - We don't understand here in Europe (especially in France) what's going on in the US. Can someone explain how we got there ? [/B]
hmmmmmm.....your first post and you're throwing hand grenades? VERY interesting.
---To speak intelligently about foreign policy assumes you have ALL (or most of) the relevent data, and know ALL (or most of) the intentions of the involved nations---which none of us on these forums can legitimatly do. We are all speculating on a deficit of information.
BUT, if you must know....
1. If it was that easy to spot, why wasn't it common knowledge before we (the U.S.) went in?
2. On the "revealing" of your "book": read some history---governments are pretty good at keeping secrets, concealing negotiations until they are long over, using covert means of communications, payoffs, etc.
Quite frankly if you yo-yos applied the same logic to the intriguing surrounding the Amercian Rebellion in the late 1700's not mention the relations between France and Great Britain you would arrive at something profoundly stupid and uncomprehensible.
Originally posted by pierr_alex
- We do not understand here in Europe (especially in France) what's going on in the US. Can someone explain how we got there ?
Do you understand why giving refuge to Ayatollah Khumayni was not a good thing? Do you understand why building a nuclear reactor for Saddam was not a good thing? Do you understand why you and Canada helping Pakistan build nuclear program was not a good thing? Do I need to go on?
Post using your real name, you pussy.
Originally posted by pierr_alex
[B- We do not understand here in Europe (especially in France) what's going on in the US. Can someone explain how we got there ? [/B]
You're right. The U.S. is very bad... very, very bad. We have no right to any military action. Actually, we probably should have stayed out of WWII and never even liberated FRANCE and the rest of occupied Europe.
Don't turn this thread into an "US vs Europe" or "US vs France".
Just want to talk about hard facts:
- No ties to Al-Qaeda.
- No weapons of mass destruction.
- No danger to U.S. security.
So which one of you suckers had to make up a new screen name to stir up the pot?
- No weapons of mass destruction.
- No danger to U.S. security
I know it sucks. But this is reality.
Don't get me wrong: I am happy as much as you are about Hussein being removed, and I'm happy for the Iraqi people that will sooner or later stabilise and jump on Democracy (just hope It won't be Islamism). This makes one dictator less.
The problem we have here is: Do the End justify the Mean...?
+++
We would like to see a connection between 9/11 and Saddam Hussein. But it seems there's not.
So while you fight in Irak, real Al Queda forces get (probably) stronger somewhere. And who will get the next bomb in its face? New-York again ? Washington ? London ? Paris ? Brussel ? Berlin ? Tokyo ?
Originally posted by pierr_alex
Quoted from (full article here...)
...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main...questid=120459
...
Is this supposed to pass as journalism? It reads like an opinion piece but there's no clear label. Oh wait it's anti-Bush so we don't care if it's hard news or opinion. Let the lines be blurred!
1: It's a BIG F***ing desert to hide stuff
and
2: If they destroyed and dismantled their weapons program...why couldn't Iraq account for that dismantling and what did they have to hide when they refused to let UN inspectors into their country.
I agree this war was probably unnecessary and that our troops shouldn't be in the situation they are in...but guess what...their OUR troops. We're going to support them either way and pray for each soldier's safe return. We don't need the constant French resistance...you've made your point...we get it. But fact of the matter is the Iraqi people are a HELL of a lot better off now than they were a year ago and now we have a brutal dictator in custody who will be tried for crimes against humanity. That's cause enough for me.
Originally posted by Scott
Is this supposed to pass as journalism? It reads like an opinion piece but there's no clear label. Oh wait it's anti-Bush so we don't care if it's hard news or opinion. Let the lines be blurred!
The (UK) Daily Telegraph is a conservative publication, btw.
No matter which way a newspaper is aligned...all they have to do is report some truth and reality: it will automatically sound anti-Bush by default.
Tuesday, December 30, 2003 Posted: 6:53 PM EST (2353 GMT)
BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- U.S. forces operating in the so-called Sunni Triangle - the region of Iraq most loyal to captured former dictator Saddam Hussein - found a significant weapons cache that included al Qaeda literature and videotapes, the U.S. military said Tuesday.
Members of Task Force Ironhorse 2nd Infantry's Arrowhead Brigade discovered the material Monday morning at a site in Samarra, about 65 miles north-northwest of Baghdad. Some of the items were found hidden in a false wall, the military said.
The troops also found a British-made body armor plate with a bullet hole. U.S. Central Command said it was an indication that insurgents were testing the ceramic plate's ability to withstand expended anti-personnel ammunition...
Originally posted by zaphod_beeblebrox
Al Qaeda videos found in Iraq weapons raid
And... is there some evidence that the literature and tapes were there before the war ??? like some Al Qaeda library time stamp.. if not it doesn't say sh*t
In old (but just released news): The administration planned to do a "Saddam" thirty years ago.
Originally posted by ericg
And... is there some evidence that the literature and tapes were there before the war ??? like some Al Qaeda library time stamp.. if not it doesn't say sh*t
Riiight. The nonsense that people are determined to believe. Of course it says plenty. Here's more from George Tenet in a recent letter to the Senate Intelligence Committee:
Our understanding of the relationship between Iraq and al Qaeda is evolving and is based on sources of varying reliability. Some of the information we have received comes from detainees, including some of high rank.
--We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al Qaeda going back a decade.
--Credible information indicates that Iraq and al Qaeda have discussed safe haven and reciprocal nonaggression.
--Since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al Qaeda members, including some that have been in Baghdad.
--We have credible reporting that al Qaeda leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire W.M.D. capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to Al Qaeda members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs.
--Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians coupled with growing indications of relationship with Al Qaeda suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent U.S. military action.
First, the site you link to has a rather obvious agenda. Just read it, for God's sake. And I quote from page one of the top link:
The U.S. remains the biggest terrorist nation in the world.
I'm sorry, but anyone who actually believes that does not qualify for me even paying attention to him. The US does plenty wrong. We do plenty of stupid things and even "bad" things. We makes mistakes. But, a "terrorist" nation? Please. It's so absurd, It almost isn't even worth discussing. The United States is the single biggest proponent of Democracy and Freedom in the history of world...despite our problems. The US gives more foreign aid than any other nation the world. The US has it's share of problems, corruption, etc. But a terrorist nation? Come on. This kind of thinking, and this kind of statement is the very core of Anti-Americanism and resentment of American power and influence. And you link to the site like it's the Bible. Please.
As far as Iraq goes...others who have posted above are right. We have discussed it, debated it, and formed our opinions. I don't think they're going to change.
Zaphod: And Powell said from the UN that the trucks certain building were used for WoMD production. He even gave sattelite pictures as proofs. All that was quickly shown to be wrong information.
If they have solid reporting show it. If they have credible information give it. The US intelligent community haven´t had a hell of a track record the last three and and a half years so a couple of words on a piece of paper doesn´t quite do it when "proofs" and "believes" and "solid reports" and "credible information" have shown to be false alarm so many times the last three years.