|
Ron Mars
|
 |
« Reply #90 on: May 06, 2008, 10:41:22 AM » |
|
I'm saying even if they do, the US has very little intrest in stopping Israel from indiscriminitely bombing targets that may threaten "national security". All the while Israel is repeatedly forgetting the basic human rights of people in Gaza...
You mean the human rights of people firing hundreds of rockets a month into Israel? The people who refused to abide by the agreements they made with Israel concerning the Gaza strip? The people who elect members of a terrorist organization that continuously attacks Israel and seeks it's destruction? The people who destroyed acres of greenhouses left behind by Israel that could be feeding thousands of people today? Can you give me a good reason why Israel should care about the human rights of people who did this to themselves? "...indiscriminitely bombing targets..." Israel doesn't "indiscriminately" bomb anything. Neither do we. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The national security of the United States can never be left in the hands of liberals.
|
|
|
|
freethinker
|
|
« Reply #91 on: May 06, 2008, 11:37:01 AM » |
|
please make an intelligent argument why thousands of people all over the world would believe Saddam was in possesion of WMD? What did they read and investigate that convinced them Saddam was lying again? Other than Great Briton and Poland what European troop support did the US have ? If it was such a unanimous belief, what was the support from those much closer than the US to the supposed "threat" ? I note that you said "thousands" not millions of people all over the world believed Saddam had WMDS. You could probably find "thousands" of people all over the world that believe the moon is made of green cheese. The overwhelming opinion in the world during the lead up to the invasion was correct ...that the US "intelligence" was cherry picked, exaggerated and largely made up. Even under the threat of trade reprisals from the Bush administration virtually all of Europe stood their ground AGAINST a U.N. resolution authorizing military action against Saddam Hussein’s government, and the invasion.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 06, 2008, 11:51:11 AM by freethinker »
|
Logged
|
Impeach now more than ever!
|
|
|
|
neue regel
|
|
« Reply #92 on: May 06, 2008, 11:45:53 AM » |
|
Even under the threat of trade reprisals from the Bush administration virtually all of Europe stood their ground AGAINST a U.N. resolution authorizing military action against Saddam Hussein’s government, and the invasion. In fairness, given the deals under the table with Saddam that included France and Germany, is it any wonder they were slow to kill the golden goose? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +196/-190
Posts: 3,398
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #93 on: May 06, 2008, 11:54:57 AM » |
|
Will one of you in here calling me a liar or just plain stupid please explain why Democrats and thousands of people in foreign governments all over the world believed the same things that Bush did about Saddam's WMD programs? Well, Bush was called a "liar" after it was discovered that Iraq actually had no weapons of mass destruction. During the build up, few would make an attempt to argue with the established norm that Iraq was indeed a threat (despite past testimony from Collin Powel)... except Scott Ritter... who was regarded as a joke by the general media. Now please tell me who in their right mind would stake their careers on supporting an unpopular (though inevitably correct) opinion that disagreed with the general norm? Only one of you have even attempted to answer this question. And what was the answer? An indefensible accusation that Bush witheld vital intelligence from Democrat members of the House and Senate. No attempt was even made to explain foreign intelligence services beliefs.
How about it? Why are virtually every one of you ignoring this? It's a pretty simple question with an obvious answer. Look, I can't control what you see, but I can keep copying and pasting it in the hopes you do: "Because Saddam's security organizations and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network operated with similar aims (at least in the short term), considerable overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the same outside groups. This created both the appearance of and, in some way, a 'de facto' link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust."Ignoring the American Democrats for a moment, please make an intelligent argument why thousands of people all over the world would believe Saddam was in possesion of WMD? What did they read and investigate that convinced them Saddam was lying again? I think the fact that no one followed us into Iraq shows that their faith in Curveball wasn't as great as our own... You mean the human rights of people firing hundreds of rockets a month into Israel? The people who refused to abide by the agreements they made with Israel concerning the Gaza strip? The people who elect members of a terrorist organization that continuously attacks Israel and seeks it's destruction? The people who destroyed acres of greenhouses left behind by Israel that could be feeding thousands of people today?
Can you give me a good reason why Israel should care about the human rights of people who did this to themselves? Despite what Israel says, everyone in Gaza doesn't work for Hamas. "...indiscriminitely bombing targets..." Israel doesn't "indiscriminately" bomb anything. Neither do we. You're right. They blow up the things they want to... plausible explanation or reason be damned. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
Ron Mars
|
|
« Reply #94 on: May 06, 2008, 12:13:32 PM » |
|
Other than Great Briton and Poland what European troop support did the US have ?
Few nations provided troops to fight in Korea but dozens supported the effort. There are currently 25 nations that support OIF. http://www.mnf-iraq.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=blogcategory&id=49&Itemid=129 If it was such a unanimous belief, what was the support from those much closer than the US to the supposed "threat" ? I note that you said "thousands" not millions of people all over the world believed Saddam had WMDS.
For the grammatically challenged; the "thousands" referred to thousands in foreign governments and their respective intelligence services who believed Saddam had WMDS. ...that the US "intelligence" was cherry picked, exaggerated and largely made up.
This is a lie and you know it WJ. Despite desperate efforts you haven't even scratched the surface. I asked for an intelligent argument. If you can't provide one then just say so. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The national security of the United States can never be left in the hands of liberals.
|
|
|
|
freethinker
|
|
« Reply #95 on: May 06, 2008, 12:20:50 PM » |
|
Israel doesn't "indiscriminately" bomb anything. Neither do we. So this was discriminate and intentional? Fleeing Lebanese Speak of Indiscriminate Bombing
ADDABBAOUSIYEH (northern Lebanese border) - People fleeing the bombing of Lebanon say the Israelis are targeting civilian neighbourhoods and vital infrastructure, and not just Hezbollah centres.
The bombing has killed more than 100 Lebanese civilians so far.
Lebanese children and a woman flee in a truck from the Bekaa Valley in eastern Lebanon July 17,2006. Israel bombarded Lebanon for a sixth day on Monday and dismissed as premature a proposal for an international stability force to help end the worst fighting across the Israeli-Lebanese border in more than 20 years. REUTERS/Jamal Saidi(LEBANON)
Several border points between Syria and Lebanon are being deluged with refugees. Lebanon has a long border with Syria towards its south, east and north. The refugees include both Lebanese and tourists.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines06/0717-04.htm And this? When U.S. bombs hit a civilian warehouse in Afghanistan last year, U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld responded: "We're not running out of targets, Afghanistan is." There was laughter in the press gallery.
The bombs continued to fall. We now know that Rumsfeld urges using "the force necessary to prevail, plus some" and rejects "promising ... not to permit collateral damage." Civilian casualties, then, are predictable.
By March 2002, the first six months of U.S. bombing in Afghanistan had killed possibly as many civilians as had been massacred by al Qaeda's genocidal attack on the World Trade Center in New York. The deadly toll has continued to rise, documented by the New York Times. The paper reported on May 18th: "Residents of eastern Afghanistan have repeatedly complained of American air attacks that they say have killed civilians." Over the next two days the Times reported on a May 16 incident, after which "American officials said that nine Afghan men who were killed in an American air raid there may have been local tribesman, not hostile fighters," and another tragedy on May 12 in which five villagers died when American Special Forces troops raided a "small farming village."
http://www.fpif.org/commentary/2002/0211coldam_body.html |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Impeach now more than ever!
|
|
|
|
freethinker
|
|
« Reply #96 on: May 06, 2008, 12:41:23 PM » |
|
There are currently 25 nations that support OIF. "Support"? Isn't that sort of like Underwriters Laboratory's "Listed" as opposed to "approved"? Words without substance. For the honestly challenged I re-post the question with emphasis on the important word: Other than Great Briton and Poland what European troop support did the US have ? How many countries were willing to send their armies to die for Bushes lies?? How many simply pledged "support " rather than face trade reprisals? These questions are mostly posted as rhetorical. I don't expect one as loose with the truth as Ron Mars to give an honest answer. He is incapable of it. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Impeach now more than ever!
|
|
|
|
Ron Mars
|
|
« Reply #97 on: May 06, 2008, 12:45:13 PM » |
|
Well, Bush was called a "liar" after it was discovered that Iraq actually had no weapons of mass destruction.
Now please tell me who in their right mind would stake their careers on supporting an unpopular (though inevitably correct) opinion that disagreed with the general norm?
Again, if Bush lied then so did thousands of others. You have not explained why they would lie as well. "Because Saddam's security organizations and Osama bin Laden's terrorist network operated with similar aims (at least in the short term), considerable overlap was inevitable when monitoring, contacting, financing, and training the same outside groups. This created both the appearance of and, in some way, a 'de facto' link between the organizations. At times, these organizations would work together in pursuit of shared goals but still maintain their autonomy and independence because of innate caution and mutual distrust."
How does pointing out Saddam's willingness to fund and arm al-Qaeda terrorist organizations prove that Bush lied? I think the fact that no one followed us into Iraq shows that their faith in curveball wasn't as great as our own...
25 nations are currently supporting OIF. Curveball was a small part of the intelligence gathered and a source the Germans refuse to allow us access to. He knew nothing of Saddam's intentions to continue WMD production, missile development, hidden laboratories and intentions to build nuclear weapons. All of which is now a confirmed fact and a matter of public record for all to see for themselves. Bush was right. Despite what Israel says, everyone in Gaza doesn't work for Hamas.
Of course they don't "work" for Hamas. They just support them and their terrorist tactics in large numbers. Electing members of Hamas to represent them has been a double edged sword. Hamas isn't interested in the human rights of the Palestinian people, they are only interested in attacking Israel. A large percentage of Palestinians agree with attacking Israel with rockets and suicide bombers. The number of Palestinians who support attacks against Israelis continues to rise and more than half of them favor suicide bombings, according to a poll published this weekend.
The survey also showed that Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh is still more popular than Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.
The percentage of Palestinians who support "resistance operations" against Israeli targets rose from 43.1 percent in September 2006 to 49.5% at present. Support for this option was highest in the Gaza Strip, at 58.1%, with 24.5% in the West Bank agreeing.
Palestinians who support bombing attacks against Israeli civilians rose from 44.8% in June 2006 to 48% in September 2006 and to 50.7% now.
With regards to confidence in the political parties, support for Fatah decreased from 40% in November to 32.5% this month, while Hamas's popularity went down from 19.7% to 17.8%. (This is a direct result of their lives getting worse. There are no "Million Palestinian" marches to end attacks on Israel.) http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208422645447&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull"Despite complaints of fuel shortages, terrorists attempt to disrupt fuel supply to Strip Hanan Greenberg Published: 04.17.08, 18:45 / Israel News Shooting themselves in the foot: Only a week after the lethal terror attack at the Nahal Oz fuel terminal, and after complaining of fuel shortages, terror groups are again targeting Israelis supplying fuel to the Gaza Strip."http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3533205,00.htmlThey blow up the things they want to... plausible explanation or reason be damned.
Nonsense! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The national security of the United States can never be left in the hands of liberals.
|
|
|
|
Ron Mars
|
|
« Reply #98 on: May 06, 2008, 12:48:49 PM » |
|
Go back to sleep WJ. Obviously you have no answers as to why so many people in foreign Governments and their intelligence services believed Saddam had WMD.
BTW, how many French civilians do you suppose were killed by US bombing, Naval gunfire, artillery fire, tank, mortar and small arms fire during WWII? Not total casualties mind you, the number of civilians killed. Care to take a guess without searching first?
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: May 06, 2008, 01:32:11 PM by Ron Mars »
|
Logged
|
The national security of the United States can never be left in the hands of liberals.
|
|
|
|
Ron Mars
|
|
« Reply #99 on: May 06, 2008, 01:49:31 PM » |
|
In fairness, given the deals under the table with Saddam that included France and Germany, is it any wonder they were slow to kill the golden goose?
This is an excellent point NR. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The national security of the United States can never be left in the hands of liberals.
|
|
|
|
freethinker
|
|
« Reply #100 on: May 06, 2008, 02:15:02 PM » |
|
Go back to sleep WJ. Obviously you have no answers as to why so many people in foreign Governments and their intelligence services believed Saddam had WMD.
BTW, how many French civilians do you suppose were killed by US bombing, Naval gunfire, artillery fire, tank, mortar and small arms fire during WWII? Not total casualties mind you, the number of civilians killed. Care to take a guess without searching first?
Sorry if all I bring are the truth and the facts. All you have to rebut are the initials WJ and a WWII straw man argument. As usual when you run out of lies you resort to name calling and misdirection. You become more predictable every day Ron Mars. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Impeach now more than ever!
|
|
|
|
Ron Mars
|
|
« Reply #101 on: May 06, 2008, 02:28:37 PM » |
|
Sorry if all I bring are the truth and the facts. All you have to rebut are the initials WJ and a WWII straw man argument. As usual when you run out of lies you resort to name calling and misdirection. You become more predictable every day Ron Mars.
No answers once again. Nothing. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The national security of the United States can never be left in the hands of liberals.
|
|
|
|
Pond Scum
|
|
« Reply #102 on: May 06, 2008, 07:43:28 PM » |
|
I don't agree with Ron on much, but his point is valid. If Bush lied about Iraq as a threat to the US, then so did almost every other politician who spoke on the subject during the same time period. I don't recall anyone in power saying that Iraq had nothing to do with 911 and we shouldn't go in there. Does anyone have examples of politicians speaking out against invading Iraq before the invasion? I don't recall seeing anyone speak out against it. I know Obama said a few things, but there were very few who spoke out against the war in the beginning. In the vote to authorize force in Iraq, there were 23 nays and 77 yeas. OF THE 23 NAY VOTES, only one was a Republican. Gotta have that one token ya know, so the sheeple don't wake up. Out of the 77 yeas, 29 were Democrats. http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=107&vote=00237&session=2A little more than half of Democrats in the Senate voted to use force in Iraq. There only defense is if it can be proven that the White House made up evidence and presented it as fact. This has not been proven and it is unlikely it will ever be proven, so to blame Iraq solely on Bush is very unfair. I really don't get why some people can't figure out the obvious. These politicians who hate each other in front of the cameras are slapping each other on the back at their 10,000 dollar a plate charity auctions with limos and being treated like royalty. Bush didn't lie. He doesn't have an original thought in his head. He simply did what almost all presidents do................what they are told. Partisanship is destroying this country. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Abraxas
Global Moderator
Hero Member
Karma: +196/-190
Posts: 3,398
"You do not speak for the rest"
|
|
« Reply #103 on: May 06, 2008, 08:20:57 PM » |
|
Again, if Bush lied then so did thousands of others. You have not explained why they would lie as well. They're not the president of the United States. We hold the guy to a different standard. How does pointing out Saddam's willingness to fund and arm al-Qaeda terrorist organizations prove that Bush lied? Because neither side was under the employ of the other. They simply had the same goals. I could make the same argument that Al-Quida and virtually any other country in the Middle East (with the exception of Israel) are working together in the same capacity that Iraq and Al-Quida were. Basically, it's a vague and intentionally misleading effort to isolate the relationship between Iraq and Al-Quida while ignoring the relationship between Al-Quida and everyone else - especially US allies. 25 nations are currently supporting OIF. Curveball was a small part of the intelligence gathered and a source the Germans refuse to allow us access to.
He knew nothing of Saddam's intentions to continue WMD production, missile development, hidden laboratories and intentions to build nuclear weapons. All of which is now a confirmed fact and a matter of public record for all to see for themselves. Bush was right. 1) 25 nations? Interesting. We started with 65. I wonder why they all left? But further to the point, of the 25 nations you mention, only 7 actually have boots on the ground LINK, so lets not pretend like this "Coalition of the Willing" is some exclusive club. It has been hemoraging members since the initial invasion of 2003. 2) Curveball was the entire basis for our report to the UN and despite Germany's warning against trusting him, we went ahead and did just that. He was the source of information for what we believed were mobile chemical labs: "Between January 2000 and September 2001, Curveball offered 100 reports, among them the claims of mobile biological weapons labs that were central in the US evidence of an illicit weapons programme, but subsequently turned out to be trucks equipped with machinery to make helium for weather balloons." - LINKHis "information" made up several reports for reasons to go to war: "His information was central to an October 2002 National Intelligence Estimate that concluded Iraq 'has' biological weapons, and was widely used by President Bush and Dick Cheney to make their case for war." - LINKCurveball's significance should NOT be ignored so hastily. Of course they don't "work" for Hamas. They just support them and their terrorist tactics in large numbers. Electing members of Hamas to represent them has been a double edged sword. Hamas isn't interested in the human rights of the Palestinian people, they are only interested in attacking Israel. A large percentage of Palestinians agree with attacking Israel with rockets and suicide bombers. The number of Palestinians who support attacks against Israelis continues to rise and more than half of them favor suicide bombings, according to a poll published this weekend.
The survey also showed that Hamas Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh is still more popular than Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.
The percentage of Palestinians who support "resistance operations" against Israeli targets rose from 43.1 percent in September 2006 to 49.5% at present. Support for this option was highest in the Gaza Strip, at 58.1%, with 24.5% in the West Bank agreeing.
Palestinians who support bombing attacks against Israeli civilians rose from 44.8% in June 2006 to 48% in September 2006 and to 50.7% now.
With regards to confidence in the political parties, support for Fatah decreased from 40% in November to 32.5% this month, while Hamas's popularity went down from 19.7% to 17.8%. (This is a direct result of their lives getting worse. There are no "Million Palestinian" marches to end attacks on Israel.) http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1208422645447&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull"Despite complaints of fuel shortages, terrorists attempt to disrupt fuel supply to Strip Hanan Greenberg Published: 04.17.08, 18:45 / Israel News Shooting themselves in the foot: Only a week after the lethal terror attack at the Nahal Oz fuel terminal, and after complaining of fuel shortages, terror groups are again targeting Israelis supplying fuel to the Gaza Strip."http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3533205,00.html... Nonsense! Well, if you want to go into this, we can make a seperate topic, but it's OT here. Admittidly, *I* was the one who brought it up in the first place. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Either you repeat the same conventional doctrines everybody is saying, or else you say something true, and it will sound like its from Neptune.
- Noam Chomsky
... you can almost see the high water mark - that place where the wave finally broke and rolled back.
- Hunter S. Thompson
|
|
|
|
