This is why I H A T E partisan politics...

[beth]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/393539/this-is-why-i-h-a-t-e-partisan-politics/80#post_3502205
The problem is, we were looking for a smoking gun....not a disassembled illegally posed gun...........
Don't listen to me. Listen to our own weapons inspector, Charles Duelfer, who testified before Senate Committee on 10.4.04. No WMD following post Gulf War I. No efforts to create WMD. No bio weapons program, no evidence, no development of bio. weapons. Further there is no undiscovered weapons out there to be found. Period.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/MassDestruct
Don't know if the world will be better 50 years from now because of the Iraq War. Can't say that the USA got anything out of the Vietnam War. At some point, we need to turn things around with our current ideology of controlling the planet. The money printing press has run dry and the American people can't be milked forever.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/393539/this-is-why-i-h-a-t-e-partisan-politics/80#post_3502205
Ok, my point is this. The U.N. resolution does not address what constitutes a wmd or chemical weapon. We founded and shipped out 500 metric tons of yellowcake quietly through Canada. We found 55 gallon barrels in munition dumps that contained "pesticides". basically the beginning component of chemical weapons just not mixed up yet. Two IEDs used in iraq where chemical weapons leftover from the Hussein regime. Insurgents found them and used them. Since the container was not in a missle it was unable to mix due to there not being any centrifigul force and lack of high speed. The explosion occurred...but the chemicals did not mix.
Now, the parts were there. Not in ridiculous quantities, but still there. My point is, since they weren't in locked and loaded missles like the average citizen thought...it has been publicly deemed a failure.
The police do a routine check on a parole, and he has 5000 rounds of ammunition, the parts to build a gun...etc....is he in violation? If he does not allow the police to thorough check his premises what happens? if he puts up a fight and claims he is just defending his home...do we care?
The two situation are very similar. The problem is, we were looking for a smoking gun....not a disassembled illegally posed gun...........
Is your yellowcake scenario just a comparison to someone with a felony obtaining large amounts of ammunition, or is this something you say has occurred?
As far as your felon having 5000 rounds of ammunition, that is a violation of the Federal Ammunitions Law. So yes, if authorities suspect a felon has a large cache of ammunition, they have the legal authority to perform a search and seizure of his premise (if a proper search warrant is obtained).
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/rpt/2007-R-0217.htm
http://www.ehow.com/about_6400493_federal-ammunition-law.html

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/393539/this-is-why-i-h-a-t-e-partisan-politics/80#post_3502022
We gained a bit more than that. But it will be years before we understand that, possibly decades.
We paid a far higher price in the Korean War (36,000 dead). Few would have thought in 1953 that this war, which ended with a deadlocked and ravaged peninsula, was a raging success. The outcome looks considerably better nearly six decades later, now that South Korea has become one of the most prosperous and freest countries in the world.
It is wildly premature to claim that Iraq could become another South Korea -- although the latter started off far poorer than the former and had just as little experience with democracy (which is to say none). Yet it is not out of the realm of possibility.
You can't compare Korea and Iraq. Two completely different cultures, two totally different ways of life. Korea was split apart purely for political reasons. Half the nation was tired of living under a Communistic rule with a form of a vilolent dictator that was more concerned with power than his people. It was easier to "democratize" that nation once the war was over. Iraq had a similar dictator, but his rule was just as much based on religion than it was politics. You have four or five radical religious factions vying for control of Iraq, and that region as a whole. I'd find it highly unlikely that the majority of them are concerned with democracy, and how it would benefit their country. Religious wars have been occuring in that region for over a century. Rebuilding infrastructures and trying to instill a political philosophy that they're not accustomed to isn't going to change the religious beliefs between those people. Violence still occurs there on a daily basis, with innocent people getting killed by car bombs and "faithful" wearing bomb jackets. And it's been what, 10 years since we overthrew Sadaam? Is that your definition of "premature"?

 

[darthtang aw]

Is your yellowcake scenario just a comparison to someone with a felony obtaining large amounts of ammunition, or is this something you say has occurred?
http://articles.cnn.com/2008-07-07/us/iraq.uranium_1_yellowcake-uranium-cameco?_s=PM:US
I don't say it occurred. It DID occur.

 

[darthtang aw]

You can't compare Korea and Iraq.  Two completely different cultures, two totally different ways of life.  Korea was split apart purely for political reasons.  Half the nation was tired of living under a Communistic rule with a form of a vilolent dictator that was more concerned with power than his people.  It was easier to "democratize" that nation once the war was over.  Iraq had a similar dictator, but his rule was just as much based on religion than it was politics.  You have four or five radical religious factions vying for control of Iraq, and that region as a whole.  I'd find it highly unlikely that the majority of them are concerned with democracy, and how it would benefit their country.  Religious wars have been occuring in that region for over a century.  Rebuilding infrastructures and trying to instill a political philosophy that they're not accustomed to isn't going to change the religious beliefs between those people.  Violence still occurs there on a daily basis, with innocent people getting killed by car bombs and "faithful" wearing bomb jackets.  And it's been what, 10 years since we overthrew Sadaam?  Is that your definition of "premature"?
It isn't religious, it is Tribal. Europe had Tribal and religious wars themselves as well. Asia has been filled with Tribal wars for centuries as well....
You know, just about every region of the world has been filled with Religious wars, tribal wars, etc...yes, even to the level in the middle east....What makes the middle east so different from southeast asia, or Europe during the early A.D. years?

 

[darthtang aw]

Don't listen to me.  Listen to our own weapons inspector, Charles Duelfer, who testified before Senate Committee on 10.4.04.  No WMD following post Gulf War I.  No efforts to create WMD.  No bio weapons program, no evidence, no development of bio. weapons.  Further there is no undiscovered weapons out there to be found.  Period.
http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/MassDestruct
Don't know if the world will be better 50 years from now because of the Iraq War.  Can't say that the USA got anything out of the Vietnam War.  At some point, we need to turn things around with our current ideology of controlling the planet.  The money printing press has run dry and the American people can't be milked forever.
I will not argue this...But like I stated, what constitutes a weapon? The assembled product or the parts to build on? Even Charles Duelfer admits Sadaam was going to start up his weapons program in full swing once sanctions were lifted....
I am by no means arguing we found wmd....I am just changing the perspective of the debate.

 

[darthtang aw]

As far as your felon having 5000 rounds of ammunition, that is a violation of the Federal Ammunitions Law.  So yes, if authorities suspect a felon has a large cache of ammunition, they have the legal authority to perform a search and seizure of his premise (if a proper search warrant is obtained). 
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/rpt/2007-R-0217.htm
http://www.ehow.com/about_6400493_federal-ammunition-law.html
I know this. I am not debating the legality of a felon to own ammunition. I am using a comparison. Not starting a gun debate.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by bionicarm http:///t/393539/this-is-why-i-h-a-t-e-partisan-politics/100#post_3502225
Is your yellowcake scenario just a comparison to someone with a felony obtaining large amounts of ammunition, or is this something you say has occurred?
As far as your felon having 5000 rounds of ammunition, that is a violation of the Federal Ammunitions Law. So yes, if authorities suspect a felon has a large cache of ammunition, they have the legal authority to perform a search and seizure of his premise (if a proper search warrant is obtained).
http://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/rpt/2007-R-0217.htm
http://www.ehow.com/about_6400493_federal-ammunition-law.html
Yeah but the funny thing about it is states have different laws considering felonies as long as it wasn't a federal prosecution. Some allow the felony to be expunged. Then you are free and clear to own guns again.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/393539/this-is-why-i-h-a-t-e-partisan-politics/100#post_3502232
I will not argue this...But like I stated, what constitutes a weapon? The assembled product or the parts to build on? Even Charles Duelfer admits Sadaam was going to start up his weapons program in full swing once sanctions were lifted....
I am by no means arguing we found wmd....I am just changing the perspective of the debate.
I'll argue it. We did. Just not an active program or anything close to the quantities that were expected.

 

[beth]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/393539/this-is-why-i-h-a-t-e-partisan-politics/100#post_3502232
I will not argue this...But like I stated, what constitutes a weapon? The assembled product or the parts to build on? Even Charles Duelfer admits Sadaam was going to start up his weapons program in full swing once sanctions were lifted....
I am by no means arguing we found wmd....I am just changing the perspective of the debate.
Once sanctions were over, is there a reason why Iraq could not start up a weapons program? Doesn't Germany and Japan have weapons? There is no evidence at all that Sadaam would have started a WMD or nuclear program again.
My point was that the laundry list of reasons given to the American people for going to war with Iraq was completely bogus. And the more I know, the less I can swallow that our intelligence failed. That the Bush Admin. had the wrong info. BS. We went in for the oil and maybe even some personal crap that Bush had on his mind.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW http:///t/393539/this-is-why-i-h-a-t-e-partisan-politics/100#post_3502233
I know this. I am not debating the legality of a felon to own ammunition. I am using a comparison. Not starting a gun debate.
To compare to what? If you're trying to compare a felon who owns gun parts and ammunitions, to a country that only has parts to build a WMD, and whether one or both have violated the law, then you're wrong. It is against the law for a felon to have large amounts of ammunition in his/her possession. If you follow reef's argument, if some country has only certain parts needed to build a WMD, and this violates this Armistice agreement, then what they're doing is illegal as well. But if North Korea and Iran aren't part of this same agreement, then basically they aren't violating any law. But where do you draw the line? The US gets to pick and choose who can have WMD material and who can't? The only reason North Korea has backed down on their production is due to US sanctions and blocking food and other critical necessities to certain regions of North Korea. Iran is still in the denial stage, but the American public don't want to get into another conspiracy theory with them, because that would most likely mean yet another useless war with another Middle Eastern country. As Beth alluded, we can't afford another 10 year war at this time. We're spreading our military thin as it is now, with servicemen doing 3 and 4 year-long tours. If they don't get killed, they end up with PTSD, unemployed, and divorced if they were previously married. Wars today aren't like WW2. WW2 was a boon to the US economy because it generated so many jobs to "support the cause". We have the opposite effect with the Iraq War. It's cost us upwards of a trillion dollars, and all we've gotten out of it is American soldiers and innocent people killed, and the perception that we can PRESUME that instilling a democracy into that country will make them a better more placid neighbor of sorts. I personally don't buy it. Even if we stayed over there indefinitely, nothing will change in that region. Al Qaeda, Taliban, or whatever other terrorist group will still be pumping out their faithful to attack anyone who disagrees or goes against their religious beliefsand philosophies. Nothing we've done over there will change that.

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beth http:///t/393539/this-is-why-i-h-a-t-e-partisan-politics/100#post_3502244
My point was that the laundry list of reasons given to the American people for going to war with Iraq was completely bogus. And the more I know, the less I can swallow that our intelligence failed. That the Bush Admin. had the wrong info. BS. We went in for the oil and maybe even some personal crap that Bush had on his mind.
And I go right back to the simplest argument of all. If the intelligence didn't strongly indicate Iraq had WMD do you think Clinton would have let her make the vote she did in the Senate? There is no way he wouldn't have set her straight and having the info no way she would have supported the war. There would have been too much long term political gain for her. I also don't buy that Bush or anyone else seriously thought we could just take Iraq's oil. I've some some dumb people in government but nobody is that dumb.

 

[beth]

Its is only guessing why. But to me, it was fishy from the very start. Iraq was not involved in 911, did not have wmds or bios, and was absolutely no threat to the USA, yet, we went to war. Big fat mistake and a disgrace, if you ask me.
Why are conservatives/Republicans just ok with that? Always making excuses to justify the Iraq war?

 

[darthtang aw]

Its is only guessing why.  But to me, it was fishy from the very start.  Iraq was not involved in 911, did not have wmds or bios, and was absolutely no threat to the USA, yet, we went to war.  Big fat mistake and a disgrace, if you ask me. 
Why are conservatives/Republicans just ok with that?  Always making excuses to justify the Iraq war?  
I personally am ok with it for a few reasons. I never needed the wmd/terrorist arguments. The way Iraq was operating for a long time was sufficient enough for me. Where I disagreed was the handling of the war in the early years. The way I look at Iraq then is the same way I look at Iran. I actually don't feel as strongly about N.Korea because they have not been as vocal about their intentions towards a group/race of people.
Sanctions do not work for the most part. When they do work it is when the sanctions put in place are targeted at the leaders of a country instead of the country as a whole. The average Iranian is pro american. A few more years of a crippled economy and the citizenry becoming beholden to the Iranian Government and they will slowly turn their ire towards the west. This is exactly what Sadaam was able to do under sanctions. Iraq citizenry was Pro-west up until sanctions came in place. The sanctions did not target Hussein himself but the country as a whole.
For god's sake The iranian leaders are still able to travel abroad, into the U.S. even. Yank their Visa's! Do not allow them to travel. Freeze their personal assets...when this sanction is imposed, that is when sanctions have been most effective!
Going back to Sadaam, one condition of the Sanctions being lifted for Iraq was to have Sadaam step down as leader. So if this is a condition for sanction removal...when did Sadaam plan to have the sanctions lifted and still be in power to start up his weapons program again with the supplies he had stockpiled? Sadaam knew the sanctions would not be lifted as long as he remained in power......

 

[reefraff]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beth http:///t/393539/this-is-why-i-h-a-t-e-partisan-politics/100#post_3502259
Its is only guessing why. But to me, it was fishy from the very start. Iraq was not involved in 911, did not have wmds or bios, and was absolutely no threat to the USA, yet, we went to war. Big fat mistake and a disgrace, if you ask me.
Why are conservatives/Republicans just ok with that? Always making excuses to justify the Iraq war?
In hindsight Iraq was a mistake as was Vietnam, Arming Hussien in the first place, aiding the Afghan rebels in the 80's, Techno Pop and the Edsel.
It's what we "knew" at the time that counts. If Bush lied so did Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy and a lot of other Democrats who asserted Iraq had WMD's based on intelligence they saw through both administrations.

 

[mantisman51]

Vietnam I would disagree on. It was the right war at the right time fought the wrong way. Funny how nobody mentions the 1.5-2 million mostly Christian Vietnamese butchered by the NVA after our pullout and the 5-8 million boat people who escaped from certain death by getting onboard anything that could float long enough to get away from the communists. The Vietnam War was a just and noble undertaking. That we let a bunch of Stalinists in colleges dictate our policy and early withdrawal still sticks in my craw. Anyone who was opposed to the Vietnam War was and is complicit in the death of millions of innocents.

 

[bionicarm]

Quote:
Originally Posted by mantisman51 http:///t/393539/this-is-why-i-h-a-t-e-partisan-politics/100#post_3502292
Vietnam I would disagree on. It was the right war at the right time fought the wrong way. Funny how nobody mentions the 1.5-2 million mostly Christian Vietnamese butchered by the NVA after our pullout and the 5-8 million boat people who escaped from certain death by getting onboard anything that could float long enough to get away from the communists. The Vietnam War was a just and noble undertaking. That we let a bunch of Stalinists in colleges dictate our policy and early withdrawal still sticks in my craw. Anyone who was opposed to the Vietnam War was and is complicit in the death of millions of innocents.
If it was a humanitarian issue, then why not get Russia, China, and all the European countries fully involved in that war? Why is the US always deemd the "Protector Of The World"? If you think the needless killings in Nam was an aboration, what about all the genocides going on down in Africa today? Why aren't we sending a bunch of troops down there to end those needless killings?

 

[ironeagle2006]

Vietnam was Fought by People that had NEVER been in the line of Fire thousands of miles away from the freaking Battle Front. When you can not Bomb the Freaking Harbor that the SA-2's that the NEXT WEEK are blowing your Planes out of the Sky are being UNLOADED there is a problem. We refused to fight that war like it needed to be fought. Total War with No Restrictions. Here was some of the Crap the Idiots in DC pulled on the Men that were in the Air Attacks Same Course Speed for ALL PLANES on a 200 Plane Attack. The NVA could just sit there and fire AA guns into the Air also the restrictions on Bombing of Airbases and Troop Bases. Let Alone the fact we knew they were in Laos and Cambodia and refused to do SQUAT till Nixon grew a set of Balls and did something about the Ho Chi Min Trail. Best one on the Vietnam war was sending Planes that could carry 15K Pounds of weapons on a Raid with only 1K pounds of Weapons. Why Sorties were more important that Tonnage Dropped.

 

[mantisman51]

If it was a humanitarian issue, then why not get Russia, China, and all the European countries fully involved in that war?  Why is the US always deemd the "Protector Of The World"?  If you think the needless killings in Nam was an aboration, what about all the genocides going on down in Africa today?  Why aren't we sending a bunch of troops down there to end those needless killings?
Sometimes you amaze me with your simple ignorance-literal, not metaphorical. WE WERE INVITED BY THE SOUTH VIETNAMESE WHEN NORTH VIETNAM, RUSSIA AND CHINA BROKE A PEACE TREATY AND INVADED SOUTH VIETNAM! There ya go. Even a Stalinist like you can understand that if it's loud enough.

 

[beth]

During the height of the cold war, why would China and Russia (Communist countries) come to aid of S. Vietnam? Am I misunderstanding something?