|
 Tao
Village Genius
Registered: 09/19/03
Posts: 7,935
Loc: San Diego
Last seen: 8 years, 10 months
|
 Re: Liberal Academic Bias  [Re: unbeliever]
#2761975 - 06/03/04 11:30 PM (19 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Quote:
Nobody said this war was justified on an imminent threat
uh...yeah they did. the '45-minute' claim defined an imminent threat.
and we have things like you listed, but we're not a threat--oh wait, i guess we were. so then should iraq have premptively struck us? I think we should have been attacked on our homeland by a military at least once before we start conquesting whole countries and killing thousands and thousands of people.
and check out http://www.buzzflash.com/contributors/03/07/22_lies.html
its a bit outdated, but read those quotations and tell me the war was not sold as an 'imminent threat'.
|
JesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
|
Re: Liberal Academic Bias [Re: unbeliever]
#2761982 - 06/03/04 11:31 PM (19 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
That is the first time that I posted about the "immenent threat". Bush never claimed Iraq to be an immenent threat. That was my point. Tao is factually incorrect. This isn't an issue where we can agree to disagree, it is a point of fact. Testy little things, those facts.
"The inspections were working and should have continued"
The inspections were working, you are right about that. The inspections only failed to discover a few things. Little things like clandestine chemical and biological weapons systems, reference strains of biological agents, shells containing chemical weapons, new research on brucella and Congo-Crimean hemorrhagic fever, and continuing work on ricin and aflatoxin, as well as the delivery systems to deploy those weapons systems. If you can overlook the fact that the inspections missed those little things, I would agree that they were working perfectly.
bahaha! Next you will tell me that the Oil for Food program worked wonders. Keep em coming, you have me in stiches.
--------------------
Tastes just like chicken
|
 Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Liberal Academic Bias [Re: JesusChrist]
#2762061 - 06/04/04 12:08 AM (19 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
The war wasn't justified on an "imminent threat". You must not have been listening to the facts, just the partisan spin. It is all liberal tripe. if you need me to explain it to you, George Bush actually said that we can't afford to wait until it is an imminent threat.
So if I tell you the guy down the street says he's going to kill you at what point in time would you think he was an imminent threat to you?
Give these liars credit - you don't have to use the words "He is an imminent threat" to get the message over loud and clear. Propaganda can be a little more subtle than that. You don't even have to say "Iraq and al-qaeda are linked". Just mention them enough times in the same sentence and people will make the link themselves.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Liberal Academic Bias [Re: Redo]
#2762067 - 06/04/04 12:11 AM (19 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Show me a report, the basis of the war being executed on lies is unfounded, who lied, when, and what about?
George Tenet, the director of the Central Intelligence Agency, resigned yesterday, the Bush administration's de facto scapegoat for the fiasco of Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, and the heavy loss of US credibility that followed.
"Don't worry, it's a slam dunk." George Tenet may come to rue his confident prediction to George Bush about the threat from Saddam Hussein's weapons of mass destruction.
Others in the administration had even greater grounds for a personal grudge against the CIA director. Colin Powell, the Secretary of State, has let it be known that he was furious to have been fed dud information by the agency before he delivered his crucial speech in February last year at the United Nations, in which he set out the Bush case for war.
In what at the time seemed a bravura performance, employing maps using satellite photos and communications intercepts (and even a make-believe phial of anthrax), General Powell said to the Security Council: "These are not assertions. What we are giving you are facts and conclusions based on solid intelligence."
Sitting directly behind the Secretary of State as he delivered his speech was Mr Tenet, his presence lending a personal imprimatur to the evidence.
The intelligence was anything but solid. A year later Gen- eral Powell admitted that he did not know whether he would have recommended the invasion of Iraq had he known there were no stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.
Hans Blix, the former chief UN weapons inspector, has castigated the Bush administration for its "faith-based" approach to intelligence and lack of critical thinking. It may also be asked whether the CIA checked thoroughly enough the allegations of Ahmed Chalabi and his Iraqi National Congress before the Iraq war. Mr Chalabi, who is now accused of having passed on US secrets to the Iranians, was once a CIA prot?g?, though in recent years the agency had come to regard him as a charlatan. At the very least it may be said - as it may also of in the uranium-from-Africa debacle - that the CIA had failed to head off a disaster in the making.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americas/story.jsp?story=528058
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
JesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
|
Re: Liberal Academic Bias [Re: Xlea321]
#2762119 - 06/04/04 12:44 AM (19 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
That doesn't mean that Tenet lied. I don't think that he lied, and I don't believe that Powell lied. We used the best intelligence that we had at the time. Everyone from Congress was drinking from the same well. You can find quote after quote from Democrats over the last decade about Sadaam having weapons of mass distruction. Tenet thought it was a slam dunk. Our intelligence is not what it was cracked up to be, but we still did find significant WMD programs in Iraq. Sadaam was in violation of the UN mandates, and he continued to be a threat to humanity.
Tenet should have been fired in my opinion. The work of the whole organization is probably not his fault, especially since it was gutted by Congress. But after 7 years in office, he claimed we were 5 years away from fixing the problems. At that point, it is time to get a new man for the job.
As for the imminent threat debate, I am sorry that the actual facts still fail to clear that up for some of you. Read this slowly, and I will try to use small words. Bush never claimed that Sadaam was an imminent threat. That is a fact. If people continue to claim that he said that, it still won't make it true. He actually claimed that we need to stop Sadaam before he becomes an imminent threat.
Once again, the actual quote from Bush in the State of the Union address...
?Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent. Since when have terrorists and tyrants announced their intentions, politely putting us on notice before they strike? If this threat is permitted to fully and suddenly emerge, all actions, all words, and all recriminations would come too late.?
I think that is quite clear on that particular issue. Lets at least close this particular argument. You can't win it and he never said it. The truth should stand for something or these debates are useless.
Oh, wait, these debates are useless anyway. I forgot. It is all an exersize in absurdity. Winning an argument on the internet is like winning in the special olympics. Even if you win, you are still retarded.
--------------------
Tastes just like chicken
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Liberal Academic Bias [Re: JesusChrist]
#2762767 - 06/04/04 09:54 AM (19 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
That doesn't mean that Tenet lied. I don't think that he lied, and I don't believe that Powell lied. We used the best intelligence that we had at the time.
Can't have been that good - after all the UN didn't buy it.
You can find quote after quote from Democrats over the last decade about Sadaam having weapons of mass distruction.
How many democrats are in Saddams inner circle? The quality of intelligence coming out of Iraq was garbage at best. No-one on the inside, just info fed from exiles and Israel. No hard evidence whatsoever. If there'd been any intelligence worth a damn the British government wouldn't have been faking "dodgy dossiers" from 12 year old student essays.
He actually claimed that we need to stop Sadaam before he becomes an imminent threat.
So why the rush to war? Why pull the UN inspectors out when they said they had "months" of work still to do?
Some have said we must not act until the threat is imminent
Step back a bit. What evidence was there of a "threat" at all?
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
JesusChrist
Son Of God
Registered: 02/19/04
Posts: 1,459
Last seen: 11 years, 7 months
|
Re: Liberal Academic Bias [Re: Xlea321]
#2763139 - 06/04/04 12:00 PM (19 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Sadaam was a threat. He kept his weapons programs. The Kay report confirms it. While the intelligence industry has taken some serious shots in credibility, it doesn't mean that all of the info was wrong. And the French and German intelligende also believed that Sadaam had the WMD. The Germans actually thought he was further along in developing an atomic bomb than we did.
--------------------
Tastes just like chicken
|
Xlea321
Stranger
Registered: 02/25/01
Posts: 9,134
|
Re: Liberal Academic Bias [Re: JesusChrist]
#2764095 - 06/04/04 04:07 PM (19 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Sadaam was a threat
To whom?
He kept his weapons programs
Where?
The Kay report confirms it.
WASHINGTON -- U.S. intelligence agencies need to explain why their research indicated Iraq possessed banned weapons before the American-led invasion, says the outgoing top U.S. inspector, who now believes Saddam Hussein had no such arms.
"I don't think they exist," David Kay said Sunday. "The fact that we found so far the weapons do not exist -- we've got to deal with that difference and understand why."
And the French and German intelligende also believed that Sadaam had the WMD
But the French and Germans had no reliable sources in Iraq either. They were being fed the same bullshit by the same exiles. Their governments decided the threat wasn't sufficient to justify invasion.
The Germans actually thought he was further along in developing an atomic bomb than we did.
So why was Schroder so anti-war? Obviously he had an idea the "intelligence" wasn't worth a damn.
--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi
|
Baby_Hitler
Errorist
Registered: 03/06/02
Posts: 27,652
Loc: To the limit!
Last seen: 7 hours, 19 minutes
|
Re: Liberal Academic Bias [Re: Xlea321]
#2764115 - 06/04/04 04:16 PM (19 years, 10 months ago) |
|
|
Apparently nobody has anything to say about academic bias.
--------------------
This space for rent
|
|
Threaded
Previous
Index
Next
Red Vein Kratom 
High THC Strains
Edit 
Reply 
GazzBut
1 2 all )
Phred
Silversoul
Divided_Sky
MagicalMystery
Ed1
luvdemshrooms