Republican Candidates

scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
Well there is a clear contradiction to this with France and the other countries not willing to send troops in, and wanting to let UN handle. I think if there was clear evidence they would have no problem with supporting us. We are being told the these agencies found evidence. My question is could this be part of a lie or misrepresentation of the actual facts?
I think its very nieve to believe everything that our agenices CIA and etc tell us because of there interests not to dismeninate the information they posses to public in "the interest of National Security"
So do you think that our Gov't is not capable of misleading the public and don't do this from time to time?
We went into this war thinking that Iraq supported the 911 attacks.
THe intel was from numerous govt's. please read up on the matter and stay off the far left conspiracy loon websites.
What you suggest is a worlwide coverup of facts pre 9/11. You would also have to include the Clinton Admin. That is one heck of a conspiracy theory.
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
Well there is a clear contradiction to this with France and the other countries not willing to send troops in, and wanting to let UN handle. I think if there was clear evidence they would have no problem with supporting us. We are being told the these agencies found evidence. My question is could this be part of a lie or misrepresentation of the actual facts?
I think its very nieve to believe everything that our agenices CIA and etc tell us because of there interests not to dismeninate the information they posses to public in "the interest of National Security"
So do you think that our Gov't is not capable of misleading the public and don't do this from time to time?
We went into this war thinking that Iraq supported the 911 attacks.
UN inspectors: Saddam shipped out WMD before war and after
UN Report 2004
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM
The United Nations has determined that Saddam Hussein shipped weapons of mass destruction components as well as medium-range ballistic missiles before, during and after the U.S.-led war against Iraq in 2003.
The UN Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission briefed the Security Council on new findings that could help trace the whereabouts of Saddam's missile and WMD program.
The briefing contained satellite photographs that demonstrated the speed with which Saddam dismantled his missile and WMD sites before and during the war. Council members were shown photographs of a ballistic missile site outside Baghdad in May 2003, and then saw a satellite image of the same location in February 2004, in which facilities had disappeared.
UNMOVIC acting executive chairman Demetrius Perricos told the council on June 9 that "the only controls at the borders are for the weight of the scrap metal, and to check whether there are any explosive or radioactive materials within the scrap," Middle East Newsline reported.
"It's being exported," Perricos said after the briefing. "It's being traded out. And there is a large variety of scrap metal from very new to very old, and slowly, it seems the country is depleted of metal."
"The removal of these materials from Iraq raises concerns with regard to proliferation risks," Perricos told the council. Perricos also reported that inspectors found Iraqi WMD and missile components shipped abroad that still contained UN inspection tags.
He said the Iraqi facilities were dismantled and sent both to Europe and around the Middle East. at the rate of about 1,000 tons of metal a month. Destionations included Jordan, the Netherlands and Turkey.
The Baghdad missile site contained a range of WMD and dual-use components, UN officials said. They included missile components, reactor vessel and fermenters – the latter required for the production of chemical and biological warheads.
 
scubadoo

scubadoo

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
Well there is a clear contradiction to this with France and the other countries not willing to send troops in, and wanting to let UN handle. I think if there was clear evidence they would have no problem with supporting us. .
Charles R. Smith
Thursday, Oct. 23, 2003
French Weapons Dated 2001
NewsMax has obtained exclusive photographs proving that Iraq violated a U.N. Security Council ban on importing weapons. The photographs show a wide variety of imported weapons with production dates as recent as 2001.
A U.S. military inspection team that visited an Iraqi air force munitions site in late September 2003 took the photographs. The site, located in the Suni triangle near Baghdad, has at least 13 concrete bunkers filled with missiles, bombs and bomb-fusing devices.
U.S. military teams uncovered several examples of U.N. violations, including a number of French bomb fuses with a production date of "2001-Sep-5."
The French-made aerial bomb fuses had documentation noting that the devices were produced in 2001. The French bomb fuses were stored in a box stating the manufacture date was 1985 in an apparent effort to mislead U.N. and U.S. inspectors
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
•There are other problems, the “surplus” was an expected surplus based on growth continuing at the rate it was growing for the previous years. So it assumed more growth than was actually realized. There was no actual surplus.
•For 54 straight months more jobs have been added to the market. And at 4.6% unemployment is within a frictional range of unemployment. That is generally accepted by the Fed.
•The poverty level, and the stock market are sexy numbers but show very little on how the market is actually doing. So I really won’t address those. Other than our income disparity based on the gini index has historically been a little high, and the change is most likely statistically the same. That is more of a anthropological policy discussion than a economic discussion.
•Spending is to much, but you seriously can’t believe that a Democrat is going to reign in public spending. As was described about Bush’s executive order ended non-voting earmarks. Peloci and Reid were fuming.
 
rylan1

rylan1

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
Whatever France, Russia and Germany's real motivations were for not supporting the war none of them ever stated there were no WMD's period. I honestly, with the level of undisputed facts available, can't believe there are still people pushing the Bush lied fable.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/...n3749494.shtml
Sadaam even said there was no WMD's... Why are you all so gung-ho about these WMD's. We haven't found any.. and I've heard the arguement they were shipped across the border... or they are under the Tigris River or whatever... Fact is that this was premature at best... I aslo find the timing of the war very ironic. I can apprieciate your "love" for Bush, but you all act as if he can do no wrong and has been the best president since your other icon Reagan. We have no problems in this country... the

[hr]
crisis is not as bad as being reported, our economy is booming, medical care/coverage....nothing wrong with that. People just need to get off their lazy rears and work. Lets give $10's of Billions to Pakistan, but sit idlely to what is going on in Darfur, Congo, and Kenya. Lets wage a war in Iraq, but we will use far less resources going after Bin Laden...We will also make the world a little less stable...
 
1journeyman

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
.... I can apprieciate your "love" for Bush, but you all act as if he can do no wrong and has been the best president since your other icon Reagan. We have no problems in this country... the

[hr]
crisis is not as bad as being reported, our economy is booming, medical care/coverage....nothing wrong with that. People just need to get off their lazy rears and work. Lets give $10's of Billions to Pakistan, but sit idlely to what is going on in Darfur, Congo, and Kenya. Lets wage a war in Iraq, but we will use far less resources going after Bin Laden...We will also make the world a little less stable...
*We did find WMDs Rylan... just not near as many nor the type we were expecting... Sarin and Mustard Gas are both classified as WMDs.
*No one is saying President Bush "can do no wrong". What we want, however, is an honest and truthful discussion. You and many other critics post absolute 100% inaccurate information in an attempt to discredit the President. We keep trying to point out the errors posted, and you and the other critics simply ignore the truth and move on (see the several posts above where we point out your economic news post is 4 years old for instance)
*No one said the economy is booming. We have, however, pointed out it's not, by clear definition, in a recession. Again, simply the truth.
*No one has said the m ortgage issue is not bad. We just have pointed out it's not the Federal Government's respoonsibility to bail out irresponsible buyers.
*You frequently bring up Africa, yet fail to offer ANY solution or any reason WHY we should get involved (Pakistan is nuclear... it is in our best interest to keep them stable)
*We removed two governments in the last 8 years that were proven to support terrorism (Afghanistan supported Al Qaeda and Saddam supported Hezbollah and Hamas among others). That makes the world more, not less, stable
Any chance we can discuss these points instead of switching topics again?
 
reefraff

reefraff

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
Sadaam even said there was no WMD's... Why are you all so gung-ho about these WMD's. We haven't found any.. and I've heard the arguement they were shipped across the border... or they are under the Tigris River or whatever... Fact is that this was premature at best... I aslo find the timing of the war very ironic. I can apprieciate your "love" for Bush, but you all act as if he can do no wrong and has been the best president since your other icon Reagan. We have no problems in this country... the

[hr]
crisis is not as bad as being reported, our economy is booming, medical care/coverage....nothing wrong with that. People just need to get off their lazy rears and work. Lets give $10's of Billions to Pakistan, but sit idlely to what is going on in Darfur, Congo, and Kenya. Lets wage a war in Iraq, but we will use far less resources going after Bin Laden...We will also make the world a little less stable...
Your problem is your hatred of Bush overshadows whatever common sense you might have. Did you not read the article? Hussein intentionally gave the impression that he was hiding WMD's. That is why all the intellegence agencies of France, Russia, Germany, England, Isreal, etc. believed Iraq was hiding the weapons. How can you say Bush lied if he was being told there were weapons there? CIA chief George tennet who was appointed by Bill Clinton told Bush it was a "Slam Dunk" that the weapons were there.
Another thing that cracks me up about liberals is their hypocricy regarding Africa. They say we need to get out of Iraq because it is a civil war yet they want us to get involved in the middle of a civil war in Africa where we have no national interest. Why isn't the UN in Africa? Satan, I mean Bush has no control over what the UN does. It isn't like the UN is doing anything in Iraq or Afghanistan so they have more than enough troops to do the job.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
Sadaam even said there was no WMD's... Why are you all so gung-ho about these WMD's. We haven't found any.. and I've heard the arguement they were shipped across the border... or they are under the Tigris River or whatever... Fact is that this was premature at best... I aslo find the timing of the war very ironic. I can apprieciate your "love" for Bush, but you all act as if he can do no wrong and has been the best president since your other icon Reagan. We have no problems in this country... the

[hr]
crisis is not as bad as being reported, our economy is booming, medical care/coverage....nothing wrong with that. People just need to get off their lazy rears and work. Lets give $10's of Billions to Pakistan, but sit idlely to what is going on in Darfur, Congo, and Kenya. Lets wage a war in Iraq, but we will use far less resources going after Bin Laden...We will also make the world a little less stable...
My support or lack thereof is the result of an educated opinion of substantiated information from as neutral as you can be sources of political and economical discourse. I have an a BBA in economics I've studied over the past 5 years economic indicators, trends, disected the monitary policy of greenspan and this yahoo Bernanke. I have taken whole classes on differences between the Freeman and Keynesian economic economic policies.
So I have a fairly educated view on the subject of economics.
I'm a second generation american whose family DID work hard, and made it on their own without the aid of entitlement programs that in their minds only breed lazyness. My family has fought racism, sexism, and language barrier. The other day my grandfather told me in spanish, "you can do anything, because you can speak english." Imagine if a person recieving "the check" were to have that outlook on life, instead of looking for her next baby daddy?
Sure people get "delt bad hands" but most are NOT insurmountable.
Imagine if black leaders would stop playing the victim and blaming other people for their own problems. (You could look at Condi Rice as an example of someone who "worked hard" and made herself) Imagine if "black leaders" were not race bating political hacks, but instead focused their power to encourge education, productivity, self reliance, and self responsibility. Instead of government reliance and entitlement.
I don't believe in looking at government to take care of me. They have been trying to for generations and we still have poverty. The government can't get you out of poverty only YOU can. So you knock our devotion to our principles. But I believe in them because I've seen them work. I'm not some rich kid from the suburbs who doesn't know poverty. I'm someone who has seen his family put these principles to work and has succeeded. I have an education that has molded my views on economics.
I'm not the one following blindly.
 
rylan1

rylan1

Active Member
Originally Posted by reefraff
Your problem is your hatred of Bush overshadows whatever common sense you might have. Did you not read the article? Hussein intentionally gave the impression that he was hiding WMD's. That is why all the intellegence agencies of France, Russia, Germany, England, Isreal, etc. believed Iraq was hiding the weapons. How can you say Bush lied if he was being told there were weapons there? CIA chief George tennet who was appointed by Bill Clinton told Bush it was a "Slam Dunk" that the weapons were there.
Another thing that cracks me up about liberals is their hypocricy regarding Africa. They say we need to get out of Iraq because it is a civil war yet they want us to get involved in the middle of a civil war in Africa where we have no national interest. Why isn't the UN in Africa? Satan, I mean Bush has no control over what the UN does. It isn't like the UN is doing anything in Iraq or Afghanistan so they have more than enough troops to do the job.
No the policy is hypocritical... Over 5 million people have been killed in Darfur in the last 10 years. ... The reason why the UN has not done anything in Iraq is because we went over their heads to wage this war. We did not follow the rules or war. My point is that we say we want to spread democracy, end terrany, and ethinic cleansing... Case in point... you always want to bring up Saddam's mass killing of Kurds... I don't hate Bush. I just believe that his presidency has been a disaster. Frankly, you probably can't blame Bush for all of this because he is not the one making all these decisions.
As far as WMD's that "slam dunk" is really an "airball". By the way what happened to George Tenant? So did Saddam have WMD's are not? I think he may have gave the impression, but if he did it was to intimidate Iran. So the intelligence was wrong... and we went into a war w/o regrad of the consequenses or a long term plan. There will not be a democracy in Iraq.. and we have caused years of unrest because I don't see any leader who will be able to maintain control.
And since you brought up Tenant... lets look at what happened to former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his CIA wife... She was a covert operative in weapons of mass destruction and he investigated the "false" claim about Iraq buying uranium from S.Africa.. So do you see a pattern here... that makes a case for the whole thing being a lie?
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
No the policy is hypocritical... Over 5 million people have been killed in Darfur in the last 10 years. ... The reason why the UN has not done anything in Iraq is because we went over their heads to wage this war. We did not follow the rules or war. My point is that we say we want to spread democracy, end terrany, and ethinic cleansing... Case in point... you always want to bring up Saddam's mass killing of Kurds... I don't hate Bush. I just believe that his presidency has been a disaster. Frankly, you probably can't blame Bush for all of this because he is not the one making all these decisions.
As far as WMD's that "slam dunk" is really an "airball". By the way what happened to George Tennant? So did Saddam have WMD's are not? I think he may have gave the impression, but if he did it was to intimidate Iran. So the intelligence was wrong... and we went into a war w/o regrad of the consequenses or a long term plan. There will not be a democracy in Iraq.. and we have caused years of unrest because I don't see any leader who will be able to maintain control.
Are you serious? did not follow rules or (of?) war? How? Especially since we aren't fighting uniformed soldiers.
We went over the Un's head? We went to them, we showed them their own resolutions, yet they declined to keep their word. For reasons that are now much more clear. (oil for food)
But once again your lack of belief in this country is saddening.
 
rylan1

rylan1

Active Member
Originally Posted by stdreb27
Are you serious? did not follow rules or (of?) war? How? Especially since we aren't fighting uniformed soldiers.
We went over the Un's head? We went to them, we showed them their own resolutions, yet they declined to keep their word. For reasons that are now much more clear. (oil for food)
But once again your lack of belief in this country is saddening.
I believe in country, but not the current admin... there is a clear difference..
As far as the UN... didn't they want us to wait? And there are international rules for war that we violated.
What's up with blackwater... do we hire mercenaries too?
 
1journeyman

1journeyman

Active Member

Originally Posted by Rylan1
No the policy is hypocritical... Over 5 million people have been killed in Darfur in the last 10 years. ... The reason why the UN has not done anything in Iraq is because we went over their heads to wage this war. We did not follow the rules or war. My point is that we say we want to spread democracy, end terrany, and ethinic cleansing... Case in point... you always want to bring up Saddam's mass killing of Kurds... I don't hate Bush. I just believe that his presidency has been a disaster. Frankly, you probably can't blame Bush for all of this because he is not the one making all these decisions.
As far as WMD's that "slam dunk" is really an "airball". By the way what happened to George Tennant? So did Saddam have WMD's are not? I think he may have gave the impression, but if he did it was to intimidate Iran. So the intelligence was wrong... and we went into a war w/o regrad of the consequenses or a long term plan. There will not be a democracy in Iraq.. and we have caused years of unrest because I don't see any leader who will be able to maintain control.
Well at least we kind of stayed on topic...
First off, Iraq. We did not go over the heads of the UN. Read the plethora of UN Resolutions leading up to our removing Saddam. For instance, Resolution 1441 says, in part: "... in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations"
You say the UN did nothing in Iraq because we went over their heads. Let me ask, then, WHAT THE HECK HAS STOPPED THEM IN AFRICA? Are we mysteriously going over their heads there too?
This is sheer hypocrisy. You think we should have waited on Iraq for the UN, but we should go over the UN's head in Africa.... Rylan, Africa is a humanitarian crisis.... Iraq was a military threat. BIG difference. Our soldiers are for fighting, not passing out rice.
We've already discussed Africa. You fail to address any of the actual issues there.
*Clinton pulled us out
*Civil War
*Children soldiers that our military would be forced to slaughter....
There already is Democracy in Iraq... TheotherIraq.org is a good example. They've aparently made more progress towards Democracy in 5 years in Iraq than the Kenyans have in 17. Is it safe to say Democracy in Kenya has failed based on the violence currently going on there?
 
1journeyman

1journeyman

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
I believe in country, but not the current admin... there is a clear difference..
As far as the UN... didn't they want us to wait? And there are international rules for war that we violated.
What's up with blackwater... do we hire mercenaries too?
Surprisingly we didn't actually discuss any previous inaccuracies.
Wow... 26 pages for the "Blackwater Mercenary" comment to show up.
You're digging deep there Rylan...
Blackwater are contracted by the UNITED STATES STATE DEPARTMENT. They were given a license to operate under Clinton... They provide Security for the State Department in war zones. Bodyguards, the last time I checked, do not qualify as Mercenaries.
Careful what you say about them. They have offered to go into Darfur to stop the Genocide. Those "mercenaries" may do what your vaunted UN has failed to do.
What "international rules of war" (such a stupid term anyway) have we violated?
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
There will not be a democracy in Iraq.. and we have caused years of unrest because I don't see any leader who will be able to maintain control.
It isn't just our current administration.
 
stdreb27

stdreb27

Active Member
Originally Posted by Rylan1
And since you brought up Tenant... lets look at what happened to former Ambassador Joseph Wilson and his CIA wife... She was a covert operative in weapons of mass destruction and he investigated the "false" claim about Iraq buying uranium from S.Africa.. So do you see a pattern here... that makes a case for the whole thing being a lie?
Except that really really awkward political leanings of the Wilson and Plames that riddles holes in that idea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top