or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › What neocons don't tell you
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What neocons don't tell you

post #1 of 209
Thread Starter 
This thread is for the purpose of thinking through the actions of the US in response to 9/11 2001. I invite your thoughts in reply to what I will provide in this post:

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11. Yet there has been a minimum of 70,359 civillians killed in Iraq since the American invasion and following occupation.

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/

Here are some facts:

US population is about 300 million

Iraq population is about 27 million

The population of Iraq is about 1/10th that of the US and yet they have lost about 23 times the number of civillians the US lost on 9/11.

Let us scale this to reflect what has happened here.

Take the Iraqi population and bring it up to parity of that of the US population; multiply it by about 10

270 ~ 300 million

Take the 70,359 iraqi civillian deaths and multiply them by 10

You get around 703,590 civillian deaths....

When you scale the Iraqi popluation to something close to that of the US and then scale up the civillian deaths they scale up to a number of 703,590.

Compare that to the 3,000 the US had on 9/11 2001.

3,000 goes into 703,590 234.53 times. That is to say that Iraq when brought to a population scale parity on par with the US population has experienced approx. 234.53 US 9/11's

234.53 9/11's

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 yet look at what is going on with the invasion / occupation.

Your thoughts?

Fellows

Ohh and not only have they had the equivalent of 234.53 9/11's

Look at things now:

""Eight million people are in urgent need of emergency aid; that figure includes over two million who are displaced within the country, and more than two million refugees. Many more are living in poverty, without basic services, and increasingly threatened by disease and malnutrition," said the relief agencies' report. The population of Iraq is 26 million. Child malnutrition rates have jumped from 19 percent before the invasion four years ago to 28 percent now, and there are two million internally displaced people, many of whom have no or little access to food rations.

The number of Iraqis "without access to adequate water supplies" is 70 percent, up from 50 percent since 2003."


http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/...ian/index.html
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #2 of 209
No one said Iraq was behind the New York attacks.
Iraq was a separate problem.
Those who were responsible for the attacks on New York ARE NOW in Iraq.
Are you suggesting that we let them go?
Would you like to fight them in your city, or Bagdad?
post #3 of 209
[CENTER]

Click for Wild Bunch Goodness...[/CENTER]
post #4 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystic View Post

No one said Iraq was behind the New York attacks.
Iraq was a separate problem.
Those who were responsible for the attacks on New York ARE NOW in Iraq.
Are you suggesting that we let them go?
Would you like to fight them in your city, or Bagdad?



This cartoon is getting a lot of traction.

Oh, and Mystic...the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis.
post #5 of 209
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystic View Post

No one said Iraq was behind the New York attacks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TNTWYnPi8yc

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1j7HPCBZKQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2rdL_WC4Zo

Gee these BS ads sure seem to blur the lines...
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #6 of 209
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post


Oh, and Mystic...the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis. Get an education.

No kidding..... I do not understand people like Mystic...

It is not the Iraqis who attacked us on 9/11 yet look at where we spend lives of Americans and Iraqis and others as well as untold hundreds of billions.

Follow the money.

It really is not that hard to do.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #7 of 209
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mystic View Post

Would you like to fight them in your city, or Bagdad?

Thanks to the failed Bush policy and those who allowed it and those who pushed for it you can bet that we can expect more terrorism when you consider that we turned the whole of Iraq into a terrorist training camp with all of Iraq up for grabs. Civillians including women and children as well as US servicemen and women are targets for bombings and shootings. In the mean time the Iraqi government is falling apart as ever increasing displaced peoples without food rations and or water suffer.

Are you proud?

And when these terrorists in Iraq get all trained up we can expect more of the violence all across the world thanks to us setting up the training camp known as destabilized Iraq brought to you by Bush and co.

Just freaking wonderful..

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #8 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

Just freaking wonderful..

Fellows

Too bad Saddam had to make that speech about starting to trade oil in Euros.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #9 of 209
Bush Sought Way To Invade Iraq?
O'Neill Tells '60 Minutes' Iraq Was 'Topic A' 8 Months Before 9-11

Quote:
Not only did O'Neill give Suskind his time, he gave him 19,000 internal documents.

Everything's there: Memoranda to the President, handwritten "thank you" notes, 100-page documents. Stuff that's sensitive, says Suskind, adding that in some cases, it included transcripts of private, high-level National Security Council meetings. You dont get higher than that.

And what happened at President Bush's very first National Security Council meeting is one of O'Neill's most startling revelations.

From the very beginning, there was a conviction, that Saddam Hussein was a bad person and that he needed to go, says ONeill, who adds that going after Saddam was topic "A" 10 days after the inauguration - eight months before Sept. 11.

From the very first instance, it was about Iraq. It was about what we can do to change this regime, says Suskind. Day one, these things were laid and sealed.

As treasury secretary, O'Neill was a permanent member of the National Security Council. He says in the book he was surprised at the meeting that questions such as "Why Saddam?" and "Why now?" were never asked.

"It was all about finding a way to do it. That was the tone of it. The president saying Go find me a way to do this," says ONeill. For me, the notion of pre-emption, that the U.S. has the unilateral right to do whatever we decide to do, is a really huge leap.

And that came up at this first meeting, says ONeill, who adds that the discussion of Iraq continued at the next National Security Council meeting two days later.

He got briefing materials under this cover sheet. There are memos. One of them marked, secret, says, Plan for post-Saddam Iraq," adds Suskind, who says that they discussed an occupation of Iraq in January and February of 2001. Based on his interviews with O'Neill and several other officials at the meetings, Suskind writes that the planning envisioned peacekeeping troops, war crimes tribunals, and even divvying up Iraq's oil wealth.

He obtained one Pentagon document, dated March 5, 2001, and entitled "Foreign Suitors for Iraqi Oilfield contracts," which includes a map of potential areas for exploration.

It talks about contractors around the world from, you know, 30-40 countries. And which ones have what intentions, says Suskind. On oil in Iraq.

The link has video excerpts from the 2004 60 Minutes interview.


Here is the full interview in Quicktime
.
post #10 of 209
Oh goodie. Another anti-Iraq war thread.

<yawn>
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #11 of 209
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Oh goodie. Another anti-Iraq war thread.

<yawn>

Can't address my points I see...

Continue sleeping then.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #12 of 209
<Calls secretary, asks for O'Neill's tax returns and list of campaign donations>

"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #13 of 209
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Too bad Saddam had to make that speech about starting to trade oil in Euros.

You nailed it...

You see we just can't have that well if that were allowed the US $ could end up in a free fall if others followed suit like Iran and Venezuela etc. etc.

Ohhh but it was about WMD right?

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #14 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Oh goodie. Another anti-Iraq war thread.

<ignore>

Fixed that.
post #15 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

Ohhh but it was about WMD right?

Everyone from both parties, going back to Bush Vol. 1 talked about the WMDs. The Kurds inhaled them to their own peril. The question is, where did they go, and when. Me wee noodle thinks they are in Syria, and have been since the beginning of the US buildup before the war.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #16 of 209
Quote:

Ari Fleicher, former neo-con bat-shit Press Secretary to Bush has his hand in these. The douche-bag doesn't even know the Iraq War veteran's name in his own productions.

Fleischer Ignorant Of The Name Of Wounded Iraq Vet Featured In His TV Ad

Remember, this was the same asshat that was laughed out of the White House press room 2003...

Quote:
ON CSPAN --- WH press conference with Ari ended just now. It's grim. Not much new but a reiteration of the "Saddam must disarm" and some hints that Saddam and other top Iraqi leaders might be assassinated if GW gives the executive decree.

Then one tidbit floated up. A reporter asked about a French report that says Bush is offering a bundle of concessions (and I think she actually said 'buying votes') to Mexico and Colombia, granting worker amnesty and so on. Ari tap-danced. Then she (the reporter) started to press the issue by saying "they (the French) are quoting two US State Dept. Diplomats that Bush intends to give work permits to Colombia and Mexico."

WOW. WOW.... Ari just drew himself up with imperious indignation and said something like "you're implying that the President is buying the votes of other nations and that's just not a consideration" or words to that effect.

And guess what happened? The whole press corps, normally sheep, broke out in laughter... sweet, derisive laughter. They kept on laughing as Ari turned on his heels and strode out. Sheesh.
post #17 of 209
Is this a 3 year old thread come back to life? Looking in the rear view mirror won't help the situation. Look at what is going on now. Have an idea on how to fix it? We either keep the tourniquet on for a few generations or we leave and let the pieces fall as they may.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #18 of 209
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

We either keep the tourniquet on for a few generations or we leave and let the pieces fall as they may.

Conservatives in other threads when it comes to bailing out people when the home is about to go back to the bank say F*ck em they should have been smarter and tax money should not go to bailing them out.

Conservatives in other threads when it comes to single payer health care say F*ck em get their own coverage or shut up tax money should not go to health care.

But when it comes to a failed war started by a failed president supported by conservatives they have their foot in their mouth.

Keep pouring money and lives in or not?

Ahhh a day in the life of a conservative....

Just as long as Hannity is on the air the sheep will know what to think that day....

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #19 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

Conservatives in other threads when it comes to bailing out people when the home is about to go back to the bank say F*ck em they should have been smarter and tax money should not go to bailing them out.

Conservatives in other threads when it comes to single payer health care say F*ck em get their own coverage or shut up tax money should not go to health care.

But when it comes to a failed war started by a failed president supported by conservatives they have their foot in their mouth.

Keep pouring money and lives in or not?

Ahhh a day in the life of a conservative....

Just as long as Hannity is on the air the sheep will know what to think that day....

Fellows

Gather yourself Fellows! What is your solution? What are the possible courses of action and their effects?

Drop your Hannity Sheep crap, I have neither time nor interest for talk radio.
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
"some catch on faster than others"
Reply
post #20 of 209
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

Gather yourself Fellows! What is your solution? What are the possible courses of action and their effects?

Drop your Hannity Sheep crap, I have neither time nor interest for talk radio.


This country needs a different CEO and board of directors.

One that is not driven by the war industry but we the people.

Ron Paul comes to mind.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #21 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

Is this a 3 year old thread come back to life? Looking in the rear view mirror won't help the situation. Look at what is going on now. Have an idea on how to fix it? We either keep the tourniquet on for a few generations or we leave and let the pieces fall as they may.

Bush is looking in the rear view mirror...and sees Vietnam


History can be revealing
.

Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

Have an idea on how to fix it? We either keep the tourniquet on for a few generations or we leave and let the pieces fall as they may.

Oh, you want me to be a War Nerd...nope, I'll let the real War Nerd take a stab...

Who Won Iraq? Everyone that stayed out

Quote:
But let's take the question seriously for a second here: who won in Iraq? To answer it, you have to start with a close-up of the region, then change magnification to look at the world picture. At a regional level the big winner is obvious: Iran. In fact, Iran wins so big in this war that I've already said that Dick Cheney's DNA should be checked out by a reputable lab, because he has to be a Persian mole. My theory is that they took a fiery young Revolutionary Guard from the slums of Tehran, dipped him in a vat of lye to get that pale, pasty Anglo skin, zapped his scalp for that authentic bald CEO look, squirted a quart of cholesterol into his arteries so he'd develop classic American cardiac disease, and parachuted him into the outskirts of some Wyoming town. And that's how our VP was born again, a half-frozen zombie with sagebrush twigs in his jumpsuit, stumbling into the first all-night coffee shop in Casper talking American with a Persian accent: "Hello my friends! Er, I mean, hello my fellow Americans! Coffee? I will have coffee at once, indeed, and is not free enterprise a glorious thing? Say, O brethren of the frosty tundra, what do you say we finish our donuts and march on Baghdad now, this very moment, to remove the Baathist abomination Saddam?"

It took a couple years for Cheney-ajad to get his American accent right and chew his way into Bush Jr.'s head, but he made it like one of Khan's earwigs, got us to do the Ayatollahs' dirty work for them by taking out Iraq, their only rival for regional power. Iraq is destroyed, and Tehran hasn't lost a single soldier in the process. Our invasion put their natural allies, the Shia, in power; gave their natural enemies, the Iraqi Sunni, a blood-draining feud that will never end; and provided them with a risk-free laboratory to spy on American forces in action. If they feel like trying out a new weapon or tactic to deal with U.S. armor, all they have to do is feed the supplies or diagrams to one of their puppet Shia groups, or even one of the Sunni suicide-commando clans.

All these claims that Iran is helping the insurgents really make my head spin. Of course they're helping. They'd be insane if they weren't. If somebody invades the country next door, any state worth mentioning has to act. If Mexico got invaded by China, you better believe the U.S. would react. We'd lynch any president who didn't.

Iran. Yes, you want "a few generations" of war? Then wait 6 months (if you can) and you just might get one.
post #22 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

Conservatives in other threads when it comes to bailing out people when the home is about to go back to the bank say F*ck em they should have been smarter and tax money should not go to bailing them out.

Conservatives in other threads when it comes to single payer health care say F*ck em get their own coverage or shut up tax money should not go to health care.

But when it comes to a failed war started by a failed president supported by conservatives they have their foot in their mouth.

Keep pouring money and lives in or not?

Ahhh a day in the life of a conservative....

Just as long as Hannity is on the air the sheep will know what to think that day....

Fellows

"Failed" is a problematic term in this context.

Both ends of the spectrum have their glaring inconsistencies. Like killing an unborn child in the womb and then demanding that a multiple murderer be spared. You know- there is rarely a consistent application of logic in any ideology.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #23 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Oh goodie. Another anti-Iraq war thread.

<yawn>

I am glad you sleep so well while your tax $ are killing people, buying weapons to kill your own soldiers and creating more terrorist by the minute.
Bush said we are killing 1500 terrorists/month. Those guys are father brothers and cousins, their relatives become terrorists of course out of hate towards the people who killed their family. Before 9/11 al quaeda wasn't even close to 1500 people now we are supposed to believe we kill them by the 10,000's.
1+1 = 3
post #24 of 209
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

"Failed" is a problematic term in this context.

Both ends of the spectrum have their glaring inconsistencies. Like killing an unborn child in the womb and then demanding that a multiple murderer be spared. You know- there is rarely a consistent application of logic in any ideology.

I am neither conservative nor liberal.

I hammer both sides.

In the case of this war in Iraq it is mainly the conservatives who support it so it is clear who I am hammering.

I wish people would demand better and not pander to either party.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #25 of 209
Speaking of history...


Historian quoted by Bush angrily distances himself.


Quote:
In his speech on Wednesday, President Bush quoted an interesting observation by one historian on people criticizing U.S. efforts to help Japan rebuild after World War II, as support for his policies in Iraq:

Quote:
You know, the experts sometimes get it wrong. An interesting observation, one historian put it he said, Had these erstwhile experts he was talking about people criticizing the efforts to help Japan realize the blessings of a free society he said, Had these erstwhile experts had their way, the very notion of inducing a democratic revolution would have died of ridicule at an early stage.

Yet yesterday, the historian, MIT professor John Dower, called Bushs use of his work perverse:

Quote:
They [war supporters] keep on doing this. They keep on hitting it and hitting it and hitting it and its always more and more implausible, strange and in a fantasy world. Theyre desperately groping for a historical analogy, and their uses of history are really perverse. I have always said as a historian that the use of Japan [in arguing for the likelihood of successfully bringing democracy to Iraq] is a misuse of history.
post #26 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

I wish people would demand better and not pander to either party.

Agreed.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #27 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

Can't address my points I see...

Continue sleeping then.

Fellows

I'm not going to address them because they have been addressed ad nauseam. They are the same points you've been making for about 4 years. It's the same thread: Iraq didn't do anything to us, we've killed civilians, Bush is bad, neocons are bad, world domination, blah, blah.

I really wonder what is going to happen to PO once Bush leaves office. There are going to be a lot of people that don't know what to do with themselves.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #28 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fellowship View Post

US population is about 300 million

Iraq population is about 27 million

The population of Iraq is about 1/10th that of the US and yet they have lost about 23 times the number of civillians the US lost on 9/11.

Let us scale this to reflect what has happened here.

Take the Iraqi population and bring it up to parity of that of the US population; multiply it by about 11

297 ~ 300 million

Take the 70,359 iraqi civillian deaths and multiply them by 11

You get around 773,949 civillian deaths....

When you scale the Iraqi popluation to something close to that of the US and then scale up the civillian deaths they scale up to a number of 773,949.

Compare that to the 3,000 the US had on 9/11 2001.

3,000 goes into 773,949 257.98 times. That is to say that Iraq when brought to a population scale parity on par with the US population has experienced approx. 257.98 US 9/11's

257.98 9/11's

TFTFY

(makes your numbers look a little scarier.) But it really is sad.
Serving humanity one sarcastic comment at a time.
Reply
Serving humanity one sarcastic comment at a time.
Reply
post #29 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Everyone from both parties, going back to Bush Vol. 1 talked about the WMDs. The Kurds inhaled them to their own peril. The question is, where did they go, and when. Me wee noodle thinks they are in Syria, and have been since the beginning of the US buildup before the war.

No. They were all destroyed, right after the Gulf War in 1991, on the orders of Saddam Hussein. This information was included in the testimony of Hussein Kamel, (Saddam's deceased son in law) who was the star witness for the Bush Administration in its "justification" for the invasion.. but that particular information was of course, omitted, because it didn't gel with the WMD part of the administration's reasoning. This should be, by now, common knowledge.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #30 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Oh, and Mystic...the 9/11 terrorists were Saudis. Get an education.

The 9-11 terrorists were members of a terrorist cell.

Do not demonize an entire nation to score cheap points in an argument.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #31 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

No. They were all destroyed, right after the Gulf War in 1991, on the orders of Saddam Hussein. This information was included in the testimony of Hussein Kamel, (Saddam's deceased son in law) who was the star witness for the Bush Administration in its "justification" for the invasion.. but that particular information was of course, omitted, because it didn't gel with the WMD part of the administration's reasoning. This should be, by now, common knowledge.

Then why did Saddam have SUCH a problem with the UN inspectors, hmmmm? Saddam could have saved his torturous regime had he just cooperated with UN resolutions.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #32 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Then why did Saddam have SUCH a problem with the UN inspectors, hmmmm? Saddam could have saved his torturous regime had he just cooperated with UN resolutions.

One can only speculate.

The serial theft by Kuwait of Iraqi oil, while at the same time forcing down international oil prices, forcing the bankrupt Iraq (after 8 years of war with Iran) to sell their oil at a $$LOSS, led to the inevitable invasion of Kuwait. US Ambassador Glaspie told Saddam Hussein: "we are not interested in your local squabble". Hussein then saw his longterm and trusted ally the United States set him up, then pull a 180º on him. In the wake of Saddam's defeat after the Gulf War, Iraq cooperated with US inspectors for 7 years, but the allegations of espionage by the US inspectors on behalf of the US and Israel was enough for Saddam Hussein to kick them out, in 1998. It is quite reasonable to deduce that Hussein was frustrated, not only at losing face in the eyes of the Iraqi people with Iraq's sovereign territory being bombed and strafed on a daily basis, with no end in sight, but also seeing that his arch-enemy Israel, on the other hand, was able flout dozens of UN resolutions over the years with complete impunity, even encouraged by the US with a lengthy series of UNSC vetos regarding Israel's perpetual noncompliance.

It's hardly a wonder that Hussein became skeptical of the U.N., in the light of its serial duplicity, and decided that enough was enough. Only the threat of a new war in 2002 persuaded him to invite the UNSCOM inspectors back... but having found no WMDs (as expected), BushCorp pulled them out in order to get his war going before the inevitable absence of WMDs reduced the perceived justification for it.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #33 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

One can only speculate.

Wait just a sec- you just posted above that you knew what happened to them before this illegal war.

Quote:
The serial theft by Kuwait of Iraqi oil

An anti-war and pro-Saddam talking point that has never been backed up by fact.


Quote:
US Ambassador Glaspie told Saddam Hussein: "we are not interested in your local squabble". Hussein then saw his longterm and trusted ally the United States set him up, then pull a 180º on him.

Indeed. Not a shining day for American diplomacy.


Quote:
In the wake of Saddam's defeat after the Gulf War, Iraq cooperated with US inspectors for 7 years, but the allegations of espionage by the US inspectors on behalf of the US and Israel was enough for Saddam Hussein to kick them out, in 1998

.

Get it right- they were UN inspectors, enforcing UN resolutions. Not some whack zionist conspiracy theory and pallet load of Hamas talking points.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #34 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by southside grabowski View Post

Gather yourself Fellows! What is your solution? What are the possible courses of action and their effects?

Drop your Hannity Sheep crap, I have neither time nor interest for talk radio.

Hey, there's nothing wrng with talk radio as long as you take the time to evaluate it as an opinion.

My point of view is somehow inversely congruent to your post: I have neither the time nor interest for political blather that has no intention to discuss solution. We have a problem with Islamic terrorism. That is known. The whole world shares this problem. What's the best solution? I would disagree that the best course of action is simply to ignore that there's a problem in the first place, which bizarrely comes across as the choiciest of measures by a few too many people. If I can pick one area where the Bush administration has failed most, it's in communication of the problem of islamic terrorism to a population who, for the most part, is apathetic. Do people here at AI not realize that islamic terrorism is a blight to humanity?
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
Cat: the other white meat
Reply
post #35 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Wait just a sec- you just posted above that you knew what happened to them before this illegal war.

That was referring to what Saddam might have thought... of UN inspectors waltzing through Iraq wherever and whenever they wanted, and without notice, on the slightest whim, with the threat of bombing should there be the slightest resistance. Since Iraq had zero WMDs sibce 1991 and no working program to reconstitute them during the 7 years that inspectors were there, there was arguably a justification to get pissy, especially when there was no end in sight for the hell that the international community was dishing out to Iraq, merely on account of their always brutal leader, friend or foe, who got suckered by dirty tricks.

Quote:
Get it right- they were UN inspectors, enforcing UN resolutions. Not some whack zionist conspiracy theory and pallet load of Hamas talking points.

You missed out the last bit... Saddam viewed the UN as a duplicitous non-credible organization, with one law for Iraq, another law for everyone else, and very special privileges for Israel, which could do anything she wanted with complete impunity. He had a good point: Every time Israel violated a Security Council resolution (which has happened dozens of times in the last few decades), the UN refused to act.. yet all Iraq had to do was point a radar at incoming coalition jets, and the bombs would rain down. Perhaps the UN has always been in fear of being perceived as anti-Zionist conspiracy theorists armed with a pallet load of Hamas talking points.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #36 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

One can only speculate.

The serial theft by Kuwait of Iraqi oil, while at the same time forcing down international oil prices, forcing the bankrupt Iraq (after 8 years of war with Iran) to sell their oil at a $$LOSS, led to the inevitable invasion of Kuwait. US Ambassador Glaspie told Saddam Hussein: "we are not interested in your local squabble". Hussein then saw his longterm and trusted ally the United States set him up, then pull a 180º on him. In the wake of Saddam's defeat after the Gulf War, Iraq cooperated with US inspectors for 7 years, but the allegations of espionage by the US inspectors on behalf of the US and Israel was enough for Saddam Hussein to kick them out, in 1998. It is quite reasonable to deduce that Hussein was frustrated, not only at losing face in the eyes of the Iraqi people with Iraq's sovereign territory being bombed and strafed on a daily basis, with no end in sight, but also seeing that his arch-enemy Israel, on the other hand, was able flout dozens of UN resolutions over the years with complete impunity, even encouraged by the US with a lengthy series of UNSC vetos regarding Israel's perpetual noncompliance.

It's hardly a wonder that Hussein became skeptical of the U.N., in the light of its serial duplicity, and decided that enough was enough. Only the threat of a new war in 2002 persuaded him to invite the UNSCOM inspectors back... but having found no WMDs (as expected), BushCorp pulled them out in order to get his war going before the inevitable absence of WMDs reduced the perceived justification for it.


Poor Saddam, so unjustly treated in this whole affair. I feel so sorry for him.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #37 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

The 9-11 terrorists were members of a terrorist cell.

Do not demonize an entire nation to score cheap points in an argument.

This is too broad in scope of it's stupidity to even comment on.





post #38 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Frank777 View Post

Poor Saddam, so unjustly treated in this whole affair. I feel so sorry for him.

Shouldn't you be loving your enemies?

What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #39 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

I really wonder what is going to happen to PO once Bush leaves office. There are going to be a lot of people that don't know what to do with themselves.

No. Believe me, when a new leader enters the White House there will be even more discussion on when, how and who will be in charge to clean up the radioactive cesspool that this administration has left behind. Look at any election from any part of the world and you will see that when the parties shift in power there are many who will oppose and criticize their actions.

If we have a Democrat in office, we'll probably never hear the end of it from you anyway.
post #40 of 209
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

Get it right- they were UN inspectors, enforcing UN resolutions. Not some whack zionist conspiracy theory and pallet load of Hamas talking points.

It's so interesting that you invoke UN inspectors to prove a point. Weren't those the same UN inspectors who said quite clearly that there were no WMD in IRAQ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › What neocons don't tell you