Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
Chaz
Trad climber
So. Cal.
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 12:02pm PT
|
Give us the answers, RockerMike.
What do YOU think the *answers* are?
|
|
SteveW
Trad climber
State of confusion
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 12:07pm PT
|
I'm not worried about it. . .
I'm worried when shrub & Cheney start bombing
Iran. . . that's when things get dicey. . .
|
|
rockermike
Mountain climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 17, 2008 - 12:08pm PT
|
I knew either chaz, woody or fatrad would be the first to respond. ha
hey, in this high testosterone crowd I prefer to ask leading questions without laying out in public my own neuroses driven theories. :)
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 12:22pm PT
|
ok, i have unanswered questions:
if bush wanted a war with iraq, why didn't he orchestrate the fraud to implicate iraq?
what did he gain by falsely implicating the taliban in afghanistan? and waiting two years after the furor of 9/11?
in orchestrating the cooperation of intelligence agencies around the world, how did he avoid leaving a trail of evidence?
france, germany, and russia all had assessments of iraq's wmd that were more dire than our own...did bush also secure their agreement to oppose the war and make sure the u.n. opposed the war? how exactly did this help his cause?
if bush was able to accomplish all of this, how can anyone (including, presumably, you) call him stupid? i think this makes him sound like a genius
|
|
SteveW
Trad climber
State of confusion
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 12:26pm PT
|
Bookworm
Read a bit, there's lot's of information that shrub orchestrated
the war in Iraq. Try Hubris for one. Excellent book.
There's plenty more. I didn't say anything about the Taliban
or Afghanistan. Bush is't a genius--he can barely construct
a sentence, much less a paragraph of thought or reason.
But Cheney, he's the real 'orchestrator'.
All you have to do is read, it's all in print.
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 12:37pm PT
|
oooookkkkkk...but doesn't the video link 9/11 to the war in iraq?
again, every intelligence agency in the world all agreed that saddam had wmd and was working to acquire more...how did cheney (if you prefer) manage this?
david kay, senior weapons inspector, claimed that even saddam thought he had wmd...was this part of cheney's plan, too?
now, i think there's one thing that we can all agree on...the bush administration sucks at keeping secrets...so why was he been able to keep this one for so long? why would leaders from all over the world (including some hostile to the u.s.) go along?
|
|
Port
Trad climber
San Diego
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 12:49pm PT
|
Bookworm has it right. People seem to pick what they want to beleive and ignore inconsistancies. How would cheney orchestrate such genious and then F*ck up so bad in iraq? if he is so smart couldnt he have implicated saddam directly? I think cheney is one of the worst people on this planet and he is full of hubris but you're kidding yourself if you think they (bush admin.) have as much power as you say.
|
|
SteveW
Trad climber
State of confusion
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 12:50pm PT
|
Bookworm
In fact, no, very few security agencies agreed that Iraq
had WMD's. The UN sanctions had effectively taken that
threat away. The Downing Street memo was leaked stating
that high officials in the US were orchestrating the facts to
the decision to invade. The CIA actually did not agree with
the assumptions that Wolfowitz, Feith, Rummy and all of the
rest of the neocons were pushing. I do agree with you, shrub
doesn't have the sense of a toad. But there are volumes of literature disputing all of the orchestration of the Iraq war,
not just US literature, but from the British and many others
too.
|
|
John Moosie
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 12:53pm PT
|
" every intelligence agency in the world all agreed that saddam had wmd"
I don't think that is true. In fact it has come out that England's intelligence agency said they didn't but their leadership changed some things, ( much like America's, do you remember our weapons inspector saying he thought they didn't have them). And Russia didn't think they had any and neither did Germany or Australia.
|
|
SteveW
Trad climber
State of confusion
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 12:57pm PT
|
Port
That's just it. Cheney isn't that smart either.
But they pushed OPINIONS about what THEY THOUGHT, not
true facts that the CIA and other security agencies had.
Yes, they have made the power so they could do this.
What about the Military Commissions act which runs counter
to the constitution about habeas corpus and trial by peers.
What about dark prisons and extradition to places like Abu Grahib
and Guantanamo. I wish I could make this stuff up--hell, I'd be making a whole lot more money writing books than at my present job.
Sometimes fact is so much stranger than fiction.
Do some independent reading, don't take my word for it.
Don't trust the mainstream media to tell you the truth.
Dig it up for yourself. These aren't conspiracy theories
about how and why the Iraq invasion/occupation took
place. These are hard facts that many independent journalists
have dug up through Freedom of Information Act inquiries, and
by brave government workers who have leaked the kind of crap this
administration has been pulling.
Do your homework.
|
|
rockermike
Mountain climber
Berkeley
|
|
|
Topic Author's Reply - Apr 17, 2008 - 01:02pm PT
|
ohhh, already getting hot. ha
again, I have no opinions, only questions.
by the way, did you know the ex-Pres of Italy recently admitted that the intelligence agencies of Europe all know 9/11 was an inside job?
see
http://tinyurl.com/37wetx
anyway, it may be in other euros' interest to have a hegemonic USA and white skin controlling middle east oil.
I've never before heard it claimed that other intelligence agencies thought Saddam had WMD. Where is that from?
|
|
SteveW
Trad climber
State of confusion
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 01:03pm PT
|
RM
I suspect it was orchestrated by the lying administration
we have, just like the rest of the crap they came up with. . .
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 01:21pm PT
|
"Don't trust the mainstream media to tell you the truth.
Dig it up for yourself. These aren't conspiracy theories
about how and why the Iraq invasion/occupation took
place. These are hard facts that many independent journalists
have dug up through Freedom of Information Act "
ooooookkkkkk...now, i'm supposed to believe that the msm was fooled by, cooperated in, was scooped on, or simply ignored the most important story in american history?
or is the genius so genius because it's so simple? put all the "hard facts" that would implicate us (with the likely result of execution for mass murder, crimes against humanity, and treason) out in public where nobody would think to look for them except these "independent journalists"
assuming that cheney wants to avoid execution, why wouldn't he orchestrate the relatively simple elimination of these pesky "independent journalists"?
and if cheney didn't need "true facts" (you don't mention false facts) but only opinions to manipulate this country into war, then aren't we really to blame (or congress since they gave cheney the power to go to war?)
guantanamo, abu grahib, waterboarding, i think, are separate issues from starting the war so i won't address them here
"I wish I could make this stuff up--hell, I'd be making a whole lot more money writing books than at my present job. "
the irony of this statement is too sweet...i think you're fully prepared to give your hard earned money to somebody else who did make this stuff up...of course, the sad note is that they're selling it (and you're buying it) as non-fiction
|
|
SteveW
Trad climber
State of confusion
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 01:26pm PT
|
It is ironic, with a tag of Bookworm, you don't seem so
well read. I won't bother to try and have you do some
independent research because you're like 90% of the population
of this country, as long as they have wall to wall carpet, cable tv, and fast food around the corner, life's good.
|
|
bookworm
Social climber
Falls Church, VA
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 01:34pm PT
|
ok, steve, you're correct...i won't do any research because i think i already know the truth
but i am asking YOU (and you imply that you have done the research) some valid questions, which you continue to ignore
you started this, so i'll ask for an answer to just one of my questions:
if cheney "wanted" a war with iraq and "allowed 9/11 to happen" in order to justify that war, if cheney really has the genius to pull this off, why didn't he implicate saddam in 9/11 from the beginning, which would have given him complete support (or, at least, grudging allowance) by not only the american people but also the international community?
|
|
SteveW
Trad climber
State of confusion
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 01:49pm PT
|
Bookworm
My apologies.
I wasn't equating Cheney using 9/11 as a reason to
attack Iraq. Cheney and the neocons, Wolfowitz, Feith,
Rumsfeld and others all were partner to the Project for the
New American Century, where the US would be the preiminent super power in the world, and would use it's military might to secure whatever it wanted or needed to keep that primacy. Iraq and
9/11 weren't connected. I didn't make a connection. Iraq was
attacked because it was part of the world domination of the above said project, and because shrub wanted to 'get' Saddam
since he'd tried to assasinate his father, George HW.
Iraq was to be a stepping stone towards dominance in the middle east to the wealth of oil and natural gas there, and though I don't know if Iran was part of the plan, they are orchestrating
the same type of campaign to go after them just as they did with
Iraq. The International AEC has been monitoring Iran and they
are not attempting to build a nuke as this administration is stating. The most recent National Intelligence Estimate created by our CIA, NSA and a compendium of other security agencies in the US have stated as much, but Bush and Cheney know if they repeat lies often enough, people will believe them. The same happened with Iraq. You can do numerous searches through google
and find shrub's lies and cheney's lies, but the mainstream media only reports their lies. They've cozied up to the administration because they get invited to the big parties and
have access to the administration so they can write their non-news that you read everyday in the newspapers or watch on TV.
But getting back to your point, shrub and Cheney may have stated
terrorists linked to 9/11 were brought up and aided by Iraq, and all of that has been disproven--I may need correcting here, but
the 9/11 jihadists were all Saudi, and had absolutely no connection to Iraq, even though shrub and Cheney continue to maintain they did. Mohammed Ata never met with Iraq security agents or Saddam, numerous press agencies have disproved this.
Ask more questions, I'll be glad to give you what I know about
them. I don't even pretend to be an expert on this, but I am well read, and I know of the treachery of this administration, and how our gutless congress just rubber stamps the administrations wishes.
|
|
Nefarius
Big Wall climber
Fresno, CA
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 01:55pm PT
|
I haven't seen the video yet (no sound at work) so am not sure what it says/implies.
However, as far as the other stuff that's going on in this thread... bookworm - you talking loco. I hafta agree with Steve on this one. It's a little more than conjecture, at this point that we were fully aware that there were no wmd's when we went in. Also a little more than conjecture at this point that Cheney and Rumsfield had been orchestrating an attack on Iraq since well before Bush got into office.
And I'd like to ask you what makes you think that the rest of the world was SO convinced that Iraq had wmd's? In fact, it was quite the opposite, as was pointed out above. We had very conclusive evidence to the opposite.
|
|
dirtbag
climber
|
|
|
Apr 17, 2008 - 02:07pm PT
|
"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."
Eh, that can be stretched to ridulousness as well. If 200,000-some troops, sophisticated satellites, UN inspectors, as well as millions of citizens don't see them, it's pretty safe to say--not guaranteed, but safe to say--that he didn't have them at the outbreak of the war.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
We can't know that Iraq had no weapons - though we may believe it. It simply can't be proved. But it could be disproved by finding one. 
Let us know!