Post #79,845
2/6/03 11:53:52 AM
|
I'd like to go back a few months/years...
when the left (anti-republican) in this country was crying out for someone's head after 9/11. "We should have known from our intelligence that someone in a far off land plotted to do evil against the US"... There is even a congressional inquiry... We should have known, there was even a mention in one of millions of reports received that someone mentioned flying planes into buildings. One report, uncorroborated, etc... :-) It's an obvious "failure of the intelligence community".
Powell presented concrete intelligence (satellite, voice intercept, manint) yesterday from a variety of sources that a man in a far off land is clearly plotting harm to us and our allies... YET, the left (anti-republican) is insisting that we "can't trust our intelligence"... Is this a seaming contradiction to anyone but me. Are your heads so far up your collective asses that you think that someone wouldn't notice?
No, you're right. There is no contradiction. These folks are clearly anti-government, no matter where the government currently stands, IMHO. It's quite obvious from just a glance at this board. It's time to call a spade a spade and move on. Even when they are friends, it is pointless to debate with this type of mentality or you will be called names like chicken hawk, mindless patriot, etc... What is obvious to me is that it is pointless to debate with those who are not swayable because of their own ethos... "Living is easy with eyes closed..."
Just a few thoughts,
Screamer
Living is easy with eyes closed
misunderstanding all you see,
it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out
it doesn't matter much to me
J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
|
Post #79,847
2/6/03 12:01:14 PM
|
whose debating? I just like poking em with sharp sticks
on both sides where I see a glaring beam, ignoring my own of course.
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #79,852
2/6/03 12:15:51 PM
|
apples/oranges
What was called for after 9/11 was an investigation into intelligence failures in response to an attack that should have been preventable.
What is being presented now is from an administration that has had the goal of controlling Iraqi oil since before they were installed. And using the same intelligence community that has already demonstrated it's failures.
Do you see the distinction? Can you understand a reluctance to believe the evidence presented by an admin that has lied repeatedly in past over this same subject?
Memory is like a watchacallit.
-Steven Brust
|
Post #79,876
2/6/03 12:54:54 PM
|
What?
You write:
"What is being presented now is from an administration that has had the goal of controlling Iraqi oil since before they were installed. And using the same intelligence community that has already demonstrated it's failures."
You aren't making any assumptions there, are you? What do you mean by "goal of controlling Iraqi oil since before they were installed" ? What intelligence source gave you that information? It appears to me that you are presuming quite a lot. And following your logic, are you implying that because Bush is an "oil man", that controlling Iraq's oil supply will help him by keeping the price up to encourage domestic drilling? Or that he won't have to drill in Alaska? Enquiring minds want to know...
The same intelligence community that failed on 9/11 failed because they didn't provide enough specific intelligence. This was most clearly NOT the case with Powell's presentation. He provided detailed information that clearly demonstrates intent. Beyond your non-sequitor response, can't you see that you are putting Bush in a damned if you do, damned if you don't position? If they give too little info, they are covering up, if they give you too much, they are not to be trusted?
A question back for you. Do you see the difference between an uncorraborated single piece of information overhead on a tapped line versus a series of satellite photo's? What's there to trust?
Just a few thoughts,
Screamer
Living is easy with eyes closed
misunderstanding all you see,
it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out
it doesn't matter much to me
J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
|
Post #79,881
2/6/03 1:19:21 PM
|
The part you don't understand.
He provided detailed information that clearly demonstrates intent. Break that down. He provided detailed information..... Yes. There were a lot of details in his presentation. ....that clearly demonstrates intent. No. He did not clearly demonstrate intent. He had photos that he CLAIMED showed certain things. Which is a good START. Now, why hasn't that information been provided to the UN inspectors so they can FIND the physical evidence to CONFIRM that what is CLAIMED to be shown is what is ACTUALLY shown? We have satelites and drones and spies. But we can't tell the inspectors where to look to actually FIND what we CLAIM is there. Why?
|
Post #79,894
2/6/03 2:57:27 PM
|
Why...
because we cannot put these people (UN inspectors) in that position. If we point them to an "unclean" munitions area, they are automatically "hostages". Given that we will be invading them in the next couple of weeks, it is not wise to recklessly endanger their lives. Slightly different perspective than what you are approaching this situation from, I'm sure, but also most probably accurate.
The US has had this intelligence for quite some time and has already declared that they will respond. They gave the Iraqi government the noose to hang itself with in their WOMD declaration. The US anticipated that Iraq would not cooperate as they haven't for over 11 years (not a bad anticipation). They also realized that the world was content to "contain" Hussein until he screws up again. We forced the UN to act, they drew up UN resolution 1441, and now are shown not to have the stomach to enforce it.
If you will read this article from 20 December, you will see the US has not deviated one inch from it's strategy...
[link|http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,73428,00.html|http://www.foxnews.c...933,73428,00.html]
We are at the end of the stated timeframe, Iraq is still not willing to cooperate. ANY SANE INDIVIDUAL would realize that after 11 years of failure to comply, and failure to comply now (as Powell demonstrated in his briefing as late as last week after 1441), all Hussein is doing is stalling for time.
No, we aren't going to let hostages even be a consideration.
Just a few thoughts,
Screamer
Living is easy with eyes closed
misunderstanding all you see,
it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out
it doesn't matter much to me
J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
|
Post #79,902
2/6/03 3:48:23 PM
|
Your Reality Check came back NSF.
because we cannot put these people (UN inspectors) in that position. That is what they are there for. That is their SPECIFIC mission. If we point them to an "unclean" munitions area, they are automatically "hostages". And we invade. It's called "war". People "die" in "war". They knew the risks when they went in. They accepted them. They are TRYING to find the munitions that you "KNOW" exist. Given that we will be invading them in the next couple of weeks, it is not wise to recklessly endanger their lives. We're going to be killing innocent Iraqi children when we invade. Rather than risk NOT killing them, we'll NOT risk the lives of the UN inspectors. Besides, the UN is irrelevant anyway. They can't find the chemicals that we aren't telling them about. Slightly different perspective than what you are approaching this situation from, I'm sure, but also most probably accurate. Accurate in the events that will transpire. The inspectors will not find chemicals. We will invade. Beyond that..... no. The US has had this intelligence for quite some time and has already declared that they will respond. But they will not share it with the inspectors so that the inspectors can find the chemicals and tell the world and the US can go in with full UN support. They gave the Iraqi government the noose to hang itself with in their WOMD declaration. Which the US then "sanitized" so the world would not know our involvement. They also realized that the world was content to "contain" Hussein until he screws up again. Containment costs fewer lives than war. Containment costs less money than war. What is wrong with containment? We forced the UN to act, they drew up UN resolution 1441, and now are shown not to have the stomach to enforce it. You need to read that resolution. No where does it require military action. If you will read this article from 20 December, you will see the US has not deviated one inch from it's strategy... Again, you are confusing the US's drive for war and "evidence". Germany did not deviate one inch from its strategy. Yet it was still a Fascist dictatorship with genocidal plans. The terrorists who attacked the WTC did not deviate one inch from their strategy. And so forth. ANY SANE INDIVIDUAL would realize that after 11 years of failure to comply, and failure to comply now (as Powell demonstrated in his briefing as late as last week after 1441), all Hussein is doing is stalling for time. Time to do what? Develop chemical weapons that we are still unable to find? It's called "physical evidence". Invade another country? Which country? The ones nearest to him do not seem too afraid of him. If he is stalling for time WHAT is he trying to accomplish? That's the difference between emotion and evidence. Again, there is no way to convince YOU that Saddam does not have chemical weapons. There is a very easy way to convince ME that he does. Physical evidence. Yet I'm the one with the problem with logic? Yeah. Right.
|
Post #79,897
2/6/03 3:28:04 PM
|
I notice the point you ignored
I'll reserve comment on that for now.
As far as my "making assumptions", you would be well served to be a bit more catholic in your news sources. If you were you might have known of the desire by the bush puppetmasters^H^H^H^H^H^H advisors to control Iraqi oil as a matter of policy for at least a decade.
oct 18 98
[link|http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/10/981019-in.htm|Link]
Aug 18 02
[link|http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/2002/020818-iraq1.htm|Link]
Perle called for regime change for the last decade
[link|http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2002/09/05/perle/|Link]
other sources
[link|http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/100102_bush_advisors.html|Link]
[link|http://www.onlinejournal.com/Special_Reports/Chin110702/chin110702.html|Link]
[link|http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0915-01.htm|Link]
I'm not "presuming" a damned thing.
Memory is like a watchacallit.
-Steven Brust
|
Post #79,900
2/6/03 3:34:00 PM
|
actually goes back to 1917
and the brits.
thanx,
bill
will work for cash and other incentives [link|http://home.tampabay.rr.com/boxley/resume/Resume.html|skill set]
questions, help? [link|mailto:pappas@catholic.org|email pappas at catholic.org]
|
Post #79,925
2/6/03 5:44:00 PM
|
The common thread I see in all of your links...
other than a definate premeditation about "what to do about Iraq" since 1992, is that they all agreed that we had unfinished business after the Persian Gulf War. Which most everyone already agrees, even common schmoes like me.
The fact that these men share common "solution" does not equate to "it's all about the oil", nor does it equate to a huge Illuminati plot (although I wouldn't mind discussing that). I fully believe that this is an advancement of Am erican emperialism (and Britain by proxie). I also agree that there is a globalization and Third Wave shock that will transpire in this century. I believe it is inevitable, as population continues to rise and resources decrease or at best remain constant. Cultures will be enhanced and cultures will be destroyed. These are presumptions that I make.
I simply find that parroting "it's all about oil", "evil Bush", blah blah blah fails to take into account the military and geopolitical importance of the US presence in that region - remember Israel? If Iraq used it's WOMD on Israel, (which they most probably will), we can no longer enjoy the luxury of sitting on the fence anyway. We either help shape the world geopolitical future or take the sloppy seconds of the "great minds" of Europe and Asia...
Another incongruity that I notice about the left is that they believe that Dubya (an idiot, simpleton, etc.) has the brains to assemble such a magnificient coup.
:-)
Which way is it?
Just a few thoughts,
Screamer
Living is easy with eyes closed
misunderstanding all you see,
it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out
it doesn't matter much to me
J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
|
Post #79,969
2/6/03 9:19:01 PM
|
Pardon me?
Let's focus on the central point, shall we? What point did I bring up? ...an administration that has had the goal of controlling Iraqi oil since before they were installed What did you say to this? You aren't making any assumptions there, are you? My response (paraphrased) -[link|http://z.iwethey.org/forums/render/content/show?contentid=79897|No, I'm referencing fact] Your response- we had unfinished business after the Persian Gulf War. Nice fade. What was it we were discussing? This administration has had the goal of controlling Iraqi oil since before they were installed. Memory is like a watchacallit.
-Steven Brust
|
Post #79,853
2/6/03 12:17:53 PM
|
Dude...great use of a Beatles quote!
I was making a similar point a couple of my posts ago.
I think I got abused for it :-)
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #79,891
2/6/03 2:33:36 PM
|
See BP? If you would've use a Beatles quote, too,
You wouldn't have been abused.
"If he's quoting the Beatles, he must be saying something lefty, so it must be good" ;-)
Brian Bronson
|
Post #79,892
2/6/03 2:38:52 PM
|
*sputter* *cough*
You were born...and so you're free...so Happy Birthday! Laurie Anderson
[link|mailto:bepatient@aol.com|BePatient]
|
Post #79,878
2/6/03 1:04:23 PM
|
That is "concrete" to you?
Powell presented concrete intelligence (satellite, voice intercept, manint) yesterday from a variety of sources that a man in a far off land is clearly plotting harm to us and our allies... This same man is allowing UN inspectors to go wherever they want to look for those supposed systems. YET, the left (anti-republican) is insisting that we "can't trust our intelligence".... Maybe the "left" is saying that. I'm not hearing it. What I'm hearing is "we can't trust your interpretation of those reports because you've mis-stated them in the past to suit your agenda to invade". Is this a seaming contradiction to anyone but me. Nope. Just to you. Are your heads so far up your collective asses that you think that someone wouldn't notice? Notice what? That Saddam has NOT attacked anyone since the Gulf War? These folks are clearly anti-government, no matter where the government currently stands, IMHO. Yeah. THOSE kind of people don't think. THOSE kind of people don't have valid viewpoints. THOSE kind of people..... It's quite obvious from just a glance at this board. THOSE kind of people post on this board. It's time to call a spade a spade and move on. It's been real. It's been fun. Even when they are friends, it is pointless to debate with this type of mentality or you will be called names like chicken hawk, mindless patriot, etc... I do believe that "chicken hawk" has a valid definition at this point. If you suit that definition, why do you have a problem with the term? What is obvious to me is that it is pointless to debate with those who are not swayable because of their own ethos... And to end that rant....... What set of circumstances would convince you that Saddam does NOT possess what you fear he possesses? ........... Nothing would convince you of that. What set of circumstances would convince the "left" on this board that Saddam DOES possess what you fear he possesses? ...... Physical evidence discovered by the inspectors. So, who is it that is not "swayable"? It's always the OTHER people who have the problem. It's always THEM that won't see the "evidence". Go to a UFO convention. Talk to the people there. They talk about how those OTHER people are ignoring the "concrete evidence". They talk about how everyone just does not WANT to see the "truth". Instead of crying about it, how about looking at what THEY would require to "prove" it to them. No, trying to see their point-of-view requires too much work. They're so blind. It's better to just turn on the radio and listen to people who KNOW what the TRUTH is. Mega-dittoes Rush.
|
Post #79,887
2/6/03 1:39:52 PM
|
What is concrete to me is
that whatever this current government will be for, you will be against. Using no logic, no basis for logic. What is also clear is that it is pointless to debate with folks like you. You are starting every debate that I have read with presumptions such as "because this is all about the oil", blah blah blah... Because Bush is a ruthless greedy bastard, blah blah blah. I agree with many of the points you make, but your premises give me problems most of the time.
The intelligence that I saw yesterday made clear to me that Iraq is in violation of UN mandates. Clearly. You have no rational debate (you can and probably will try :-( ) but it will end up being merely a rant like "because we can't trust our intelligence and because it is all about the oil, blah, blah, blah.
What I saw yesterday was hard intel that does enough to further this administrations clearly defined strategy. This has been clearly stated as the last chance for Iraq by this administration for the last two months. The UN gave them 11 years to comply and they haven't with the terms of their surrender. This administration has also clearly stated they will "go it alone" if need be and hinted that the UN is irrelevent. Which I firmly believe is true (both that the US will go it alone* and that the UN has proven to be impotent and irrelevent). What don't you trust about this government? They do what they say...
Because of the types of MOS's they are calling up now, this war will proceed in approximately 2 weeks, with or without you, and our soldiers will need our support and not the feel good happy hippy shit from Viet Nam era (that slowly killed my brother), it's about time that you either accept that you are anti-government (notice, I did not say anti-American... I am anti-American myself :-) ) and give it a rest or prepare yourself for a very uncomfortable next couple of months.
You are forced to argue your heart... I trust the satellite photos a bit more than your heart.
* Alone used to mean 1, just like unilaterally...
Just a few thoughts,
Screamer
Living is easy with eyes closed
misunderstanding all you see,
it's getting hard to be someone but it all works out
it doesn't matter much to me
J. Lennon - Strawberry Fields Forever
|
Post #79,898
2/6/03 3:28:17 PM
|
Can't argue with logic like that.
Like I said, there's NOTHING that will convince you that Saddam does NOT have chemical weapons. It will only take ONE inspector finding ONE chemical weapon to convince me. Yet you claim that I'm the one that doesn't understand logic. You have no rational debate (you can and probably will try :-( ) but it will end up being merely a rant like "because we can't trust our intelligence and because it is all about the oil, blah, blah, blah. I don't believe in alien abduction. There's no physical evidence. I don't believe in Bigfoot. There's no physical evidence. I don't believe in the Loch Ness Monster. There's no physical evidence. etc. I don't believe the "evidence" presented because it has not been able to provide the inspectors with the location of physical evidence. Note the recurring theme of "physical evidence". What I saw yesterday was hard intel that does enough to further this administrations clearly defined strategy. Yep. To you it was. Just like "abductees". This has been clearly stated as the last chance for Iraq by this administration for the last two months. And you're confusing the evidence with the US's drive for war. They aren't the same. The UN gave them 11 years to comply and they haven't with the terms of their surrender. Yep, just like the abductee. You're all over the map with your "facts" and how they "support" each other. Saddam is ready to attack us and our allies because he hasn't complied with the terms of surrender in the last 11 years. Again, there's no way to convince you. You already KNOW the TRUTH. There is a way to convince me. Simply provide physical evidence. Yet I'm the one who is irrational. This administration has also clearly stated they will "go it alone" if need be and hinted that the UN is irrelevent. Again, you confuse the US's drive for war with evidence. Which I firmly believe is true (both that the US will go it alone* and that the UN has proven to be impotent and irrelevent). Again, you confuse the US's drive for war with evidence. What don't you trust about this government? They do what they say... Really? I think you should refer back to Bush' campaigning. Reduce government. No world police force. etc. Even Colin has been shown to have lied. Because of the types of MOS's they are calling up now, this war will proceed in approximately 2 weeks, with or without you, and our soldiers will need our support and not the feel good happy hippy shit from Viet Nam era (that slowly killed my brother), it's about time that you either accept that you are anti-government (notice, I did not say anti-American... I am anti-American myself :-) ) and give it a rest or prepare yourself for a very uncomfortable next couple of months. What The Fuck ? I'm sure that made some sense to you. Why would I be uncomfortable for the "next couple of months"? I'm not over there.
|
Post #79,933
2/6/03 6:48:18 PM
2/6/03 6:53:01 PM
|
Bull****
You of all people here have only ever put forward a case that argues
"The world is going to change & America is forcing those changes & shit happens"
You have made the pathetic case (like Marlowe) that people who don't agree with you are 'Left' or some other label, when in fact what I see here are a lot of individuals with strong opinions who appear to vote across the board. You can accuse individuals of specific antics (like me accusing Marlowe of being a Rabid Propagandist) but to label all who disagree with your wonderful view is cowardly and intellectually dishonest.
You have *not* as far as I can tell researched any of the various points that have cropped up over the months - you seem to wait until you think it is time to step in and pontificate without dealing with specifics. Brandi took the time to refute you as did those others in this thread, but rather than show where they are wrong you attempt to brush all their responses aside. I am calling you a debating coward.
The only difference I see between you & Marlowe is that Marlowe shows no sign of any brains whereas you do, but you don't appear to be using them on on these matters.
Doug Marker
Edited by dmarker
Feb. 6, 2003, 06:53:01 PM EST
|
Post #80,063
2/7/03 8:14:15 AM
|
Re: What is concrete to me is [*your* heart]
You are forced to argue your heart... I trust the satellite photos a bit more than your heart. Hardly is it only an emotional argument - but it cannot be less than also an emotional argument - or it is the sophistry and fantasy of Good Guy/Bad Guy digital think. Again. Pity, I thought you could be a contender. There is a consistency in the associations of this mediocrity in charge, and especially among the influential ones possessed of the guile to orchestrate the activities in Florida, as details have emerged since. Those events which culminated in 5 members of the USSC reversing the principles which they had mouthed since their appointment to the bench, enabled the now irrefutable pattern of disregard for Constitutional principles, since: The regular promulgations from this cabal - insult the intelligence of even ept children. Along with all this recent history you appear also to miss the meta-irony of our country being the largest producer and purveyor of WMDs in the history of this or any planet we know of! So now.. you will throw in the towel of the logic of proving a negative and call it Reason: that these telephoto pictures indicate the facts which - you suggest we simply cannot substantiate by findingA Single Example. (We dare not risk the life of an inspector to go.. ?wherever it is? we suppose these caches of wmd-things are so expertly hidden. But it's OK if we don't actually find one of them: the pictures show intent.) So in the end and most cynically... you will acquiesce to our launching - alone and unsupported by other reasonable people who inhabit this planet - a First Strike, and one whose tactics have already been 'leaked'. Because We Can. It is to involve a massive barrage of those famous 'surgical strike' weapons. You know - the ones which never produce collateral damage, that fav euphemism for heaped dead burned bodies. But not Murican bodies. Less important brownish bodies. Because -?- "11 years is long enough". Never mind that for those 11 years, this tyrant has confined his pulling of wings off flies to: only local flies. Never mind that we joined the rest of 'the civilized world' inertly watching the Hutu/Tutsi massacre, E. Timor -- and that this Admin has performed not One Single Useful action re the Israel/Palestine stalemate, the actual source of ME discontent beyond all others! (Not even an effete effort at *saying* anything remotely sentient.) Very well, suspend your disbelief: imagine that the disinformation and other dissembling of this rogue Administration has been: Truth. If really you can. But you may stuff your labels of 'Left' (or the unstated 'Right') - these are merely the tired code words of all those who imagine that there is One Truth and then there are: the ignorant savages who Will Not See. Save that for a typ jr. high audience, one who cannot ID WTF G\ufffdbbels? or 'McCarthy' might have been, and why should they care. Save it for those who have no idea how massive propaganda actually works, on the inattentive and the historically ignorant. Re 9/11 you appear to elide the fact of that symbol particularly representing: the 1% who rule this country and dominate world allocation of resources; a group whose subsidized legislators have for decades supported Saddam-like troglodytes on behalf of United Fruit and their ilk. You are forgetting Chile, Nicaragua, El Salvador and our training schools for the police forces used against those populations. (We stole Hawaii from its people in an earlier, more bucolic era. In the end we imprisoned their Queen). People are beginning to know this stuff, y'know? This ignorant savage sees next: a backlash of hatred, expressed by vengeful actions against 'US' and all who sail in her, not remotely imagined yet! <3000 dead in a destroyed symbol of our world hegemony, you say? That justifies our first-ever First Strike - done against the world opinion (of even the citizens of UK, if not their PM. Yet.) Because we could not find and arrest the criminal cabal who inflicted this outrage, despite the bellicose boasting of our illegitimate President, 'elected' by fewer than half of the half who bothered to vote at all! You think Iraq will be the Only next little war ??? Just Another Iggerant Savage for Proust and against Naked Guile Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction. -- Blaise Pascal
|
