Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Kratom Eye
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

Jump to first unread post Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Re: Iraq Survey Group concludes "No WMD" [Re: Phred]
    #3119607 -

...no weapons of mass destruction in the country at the time of the US-UK invasion

As Scott Ritter and many others told us long before the invasion.

You're not going back to your old chestnut that because there were WMD in Iraq in 1985 Bush was somehow justified in invading in 2003?

...the threat of Saddam Hussein was real...

"Threat" to whom? In what sense? For a frequenter of a mushroom board I find your support for this concept bizarre. Would you support your own arrest and internment because there is a "threat" you will use an illegal drug at some point in the future? Is the "threat" that you will break the law sufficient to justify your punishment?


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Iraq Survey Group concludes "No WMD" [Re: Xlea321]
    #3120024 -

Alex123 writes:

"Threat" to whom? In what sense?

Gee, Alex, you'll have to ask the survey group that question. I was quoting them. See, here's the deal. If you're gonna crow about their conclusions, you have to crow about all of 'em. You can't use the "argument from authority" on one phrase of the sentence without accepting the next phrase as well.

And of course their conclusion that there are currently no stockpiles in-country is indefensible on the face of it. Seeing as how all the unaccounted for chems could fit in a backyard swimming pool, for them to claim that they exist nowhere in Iraq is a completely arbitrary statement.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Iraq Survey Group concludes "No WMD" [Re: Phred]
    #3120206 -

You seem to be more informed about the details of Iraq and the
sanctions imposed against it than I am, so I have some questions
for you:

1. Do you think it was hypocritical of the U.S. to demand that
Saddam obey UN resolutions, to threaten force to ensure this
compliance, and at the same time make no effort to ensure that
Israel obeyed the UN resolutions levied against it(for being in the
occupied territories)?

2. Given how the Iraq situation has turned out so far(high
American casualties, a stubborn and widespread insurgency, and
no WMD's found), do you think that the Iraq war was justified?
Do you think it was worth it?

3. Do you think it was hypocritical of America to focus on Iraq's
supposed WMDs and to not use force against North Korea's nuclear
weapons program(which they admit to having) and Iran's nuclear weapon
ambitions(which are obvious to anybody with a brain)?

4. Do you think that the Iraqi war diverted focus away from fighting
Al Qaeda? Or do you think the Iraq war was essential in order
to safeguard America from Islamic extremists?

5. Do you think there were any ulterior motives not admitted to
by the Bush administration when it came to the reasons for the
Iraq war? Do you think it was all about WMD's, or do you think
that there were other reasons? Some such reasons could be reducing
our reliance upon Saudi Arabia, getting "even" with Saddam, freeing
the Iraqi people so they couldn't be used as propaganda pieces
anymore, or getting troops near Islamic extremist supporting Syria
and Iran.

6. Do you think WMD's in Iraq will be found? If WMD's are never
found, do you feel as if American integrity and standing in the world
would take a hit because of the blunder?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Iraq Survey Group concludes "No WMD" [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #3120353 -

RandalFlagg writes:

1. Do you think it was hypocritical of the U.S. to demand that
Saddam obey UN resolutions, to threaten force to ensure this
compliance, and at the same time make no effort to ensure that
Israel obeyed the UN resolutions levied against it(for being in the
occupied territories)?

No. The fact that the conditional ceasefire was also written up as a UN resolution doesn't change the essential nature of the thing -- it was a conditional ceasefire. Basically, Hussein surrendered in the hopes of getting off lightly. Part of the deal involved him fulfilling certain conditions. He fulfilled exactly none of those conditions.

The resolutions against Israel were not part of any ceasefire or any surrender. Israel was attacked by her neighbors. The neighbors got the crap beat out of them and at the end of it had ended up losing chunks of their own territory. Too bad so sad, better luck next time.

The two situations are not even remotely comparable.

2. Given how the Iraq situation has turned out so far(high
American casualties, a stubborn and widespread insurgency, and
no WMD's found), do you think that the Iraq war was justified?
Do you think it was worth it?

Yes.

3. Do you think it was hypocritical of America to focus on Iraq's
supposed WMDs and to not use force against North Korea's nuclear
weapons program(which they admit to having) and Iran's nuclear weapon
ambitions(which are obvious to anybody with a brain)?

Not in the slightest. Bush has done everything possible to draw North Korea into a diplomatic dialog with its neighbors. Surely you believe all diplomatic options should be exhausted before resorting to military action. As for Iran, it's clear that the Mad Mullahs have nothing but contempt for the diplomatic route, but it's a simple matter to deal with -- bomb their nuke plant. If Israel doesn't beat the US to it, I'm sure the US will bomb it before long. Unless of course Kerry wins the election, in which case the US will provide the Mad Mullahs with the uranium they are seeking. Or maybe not, since Kerry seems incapable of holding any given position for longer than 72 hours at a stretch.

4a. Do you think that the Iraqi war diverted focus away from fighting
Al Qaeda?

Of course not.

4b. Or do you think the Iraq war was essential in order
to safeguard America from Islamic extremists?

I remain unconvinced it was essential for the coalition to depose the Ba'athists who were running Iraq in March of 2003. It might not have made any difference to the security of the US if they had waited a while longer. But it's entirely possible that waiting even another couple of months would have been an error. I don't have enough facts to say one way or the other.

5a. Do you think there were any ulterior motives not admitted to
by the Bush administration when it came to the reasons for the
Iraq war?

Improbable but not impossible.

5b. Do you think it was all about WMD's, or do you think
that there were other reasons?

Of course there were other reasons. Every single speech Bush and Blair ever made about the subject listed other reasons, though not every speech listed every reason.

6a. Do you think WMD's in Iraq will be found?

Some have already been found. It's possible more will be found in countries other than Iraq, such as Syria. It's also possible more will be found inside Iraq's borders.

6b. If WMD's are never
found, do you feel as if American integrity and standing in the world
would take a hit because of the blunder?

No more than it has already. As has been pointed out countless times already in this forum, the intelligence agencies of every major country in the world believed Hussein hadn't destroyed them all, so to characterize it as a "blunder" is absurd.

pinky


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Iraq Survey Group concludes "No WMD" [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #3120386 -

RandalFlagg said:
You seem to be more informed about the details of Iraq and the
sanctions imposed against it than I am, so I have some questions
for you:

I'ld like to weigh in if I may.

1. Do you think it was hypocritical of the U.S. to demand that
Saddam obey UN resolutions, to threaten force to ensure this
compliance, and at the same time make no effort to ensure that
Israel obeyed the UN resolutions levied against it(for being in the
occupied territories)?

None of the resolutions against Israel passed through the Security Council. All of the resolutions against Iraq did

2. Given how the Iraq situation has turned out so far(high
American casualties, a stubborn and widespread insurgency, and
no WMD's found), do you think that the Iraq war was justified?
Do you think it was worth it?

I think the casualties are pretty fucking low considering that we took over a country of what 25 million people and are now running their police force in the time of a power struggle. He had several months to hide the wmd but he had far more years to account for them and didn't. But the bigger thing is that his defiance could not be allowed to stand. Bush's toothless tiger reference was right on. A cop without a gun at least somewhere behind him is a joke. Justified? yes. Worth it? yes. For the value of demonstrating our resolve alone. We have been far too timid since 'Nam. And I thought and still think 'Nam was the height of stupidity.

3. Do you think it was hypocritical of America to focus on Iraq's
supposed WMDs and to not use force against North Korea's nuclear
weapons program(which they admit to having) and Iran's nuclear weapon
ambitions(which are obvious to anybody with a brain)?

hypocritical? No. Expedient? yes.

4. Do you think that the Iraqi war diverted focus away from fighting
Al Qaeda? Or do you think the Iraq war was essential in order
to safeguard America from Islamic extremists?

No it didn't divert and not essential but helpful in that it kept him out of Iraq and probably pinned in Pakistan, where I think Musharrif is trying to find him

5. Do you think there were any ulterior motives not admitted to
by the Bush administration when it came to the reasons for the
Iraq war? Do you think it was all about WMD's, or do you think
that there were other reasons? Some such reasons could be reducing
our reliance upon Saudi Arabia, getting "even" with Saddam, freeing
the Iraqi people so they couldn't be used as propaganda pieces
anymore, or getting troops near Islamic extremist supporting Syria
and Iran.

I do not think there were ulterior motives, but then I think it was the right thing to do so I don't need ulterior motives. He gave lots of reasons but the one that was enough for me was the continued refusal to adhere to the terms of surrender. A contract is a contract. Troops near Iran and Syria (two real beauties there), eh. We already had Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia and aircraft carrier and cruisers. It didn't hurt but then again you could say they are distracted by being there. EH

6. Do you think WMD's in Iraq will be found? If WMD's are never
found, do you feel as if American integrity and standing in the world
would take a hit because of the blunder?

No I think they'll be found in Syria. And once again I don't think that was the sole or requisite reason. As to American standing, feh. We are not alone and those not with us are looking a little bit corrupt, wouldn't you say. We'll see where the Russians go now.




--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Iraq Survey Group concludes "No WMD" [Re: Phred]
    #3121303 -

See, here's the deal

No, you do not have to accept all their findings at all. That would be the height of stupidity. Remember the Iraq Survey Group was headed by a man personally installed by George Bush. They are not exactly an "independent" group. The only finding you need to take note of is the one they need evidence for - WMD existing in Iraq. The bullshit they throw in to cover that cold, hard fact is irrelevant.

You can't use the "argument from authority" on one phrase of the sentence without accepting the next phrase as well.

Don't be ridiculous. We are talking about a group controlled and led from Washington.

Seeing as how all the unaccounted for chems could fit in a backyard swimming pool

You're not still clinging to the notion they are there are you? Your refusal to face reality is breathtaking.

If they are in a backyard swimming pool why wouldn't the owner of the pool take the million dollar reward and lead the americans to it? Why wouldn't the people who drove the WMD there claim the million dollars? Why wouldn't the people who built the WMD claim the million dollars? Why wouldn't the people who ordered the WMD to be hidden claim the 25 million dollars?

This is a golden opportunity for you. You are wrong. Accept it, question your beliefs, learn from it and grow.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Iraq Survey Group concludes "No WMD" [Re: Phred]
    #3121322 -

No. The fact that the conditional ceasefire was also written up as a UN resolution doesn't change the essential nature of the thing -- it was a conditional ceasefire.

You clearly do not have even the faintest understanding of what UN resolution 641 stated. The idea that it gave George Bush authority to launch an invasion of Iraq in defiance of the UN 12 years later is utterly ludicrous.

Part of the deal involved him fulfilling certain conditions

You sound like you are making this up as you go along. UN resolution 641 did not say "If you do not do this the US has the right to invade Iraq whenever it wants in defiance of the UN". Read it. Your opinion has nothing to do with reality.

He fulfilled exactly none of those conditions.

Except that there were no WMD in Iraq  :rolleyes:

Israel was attacked by her neighbors

WTF?  :confused: What exactly are you referring to here?

The two situations are not even remotely comparable.

Clearly the UN disagrees with you. Otherwise they wouldn't have passed countless resolutions condemning Israel.

Of course not.

Invading Iraq didn't divert focus away from fighting Al-qaeda? Are you serious? The countless billions and military attention now focused on Iraq could not have been focused on Bin Laden?

I remain unconvinced it was essential for the coalition to depose the Ba'athists who were running Iraq in March of 2003

Why? Don't tell me - you read that load of codswollop by Stephen F Hayes and bought it hook, line and sinker?

Some have already been found. It's possible more will be found in countries other than Iraq, such as Syria. It's also possible more will be found inside Iraq's borders.

Where are you getting this information from? It bears no resemblance to the real world.

As has been pointed out countless times already in this forum, the intelligence agencies of every major country in the world believed Hussein hadn't destroyed them all

Nonsense. Leading members of the british intelligence agency have said they had no reliable evidence about WMD and were stunned by the confidence Blair parrotted their tentative guesswork. They had no more than guesswork and the word of a few dissidents with ulterior motives.

BTW, in case you are unaware, no major intelligence agency had penetrated Iraq to any degree. Each relied on the same half-baked dissidents and satellite photography.


--------------------
Don't worry, B. Caapi

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Iraq Survey Group concludes "No WMD" [Re: zappaisgod]
    #3123031 -

Quote:
He gave lots of reasons but the one that was enough for me was the continued refusal to adhere to the terms of surrender. A contract is a contract.

Kinda ironic that we did not adhere to the security council........


--------------------
Re-Defeat Bush in '04

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: Iraq Survey Group concludes "No WMD" [Re: Xlea321]
    #3123673 -

See
http://www.itsallpolitics.com/viewtopic.php?t=228

Syria hiding Iraq WMDs
http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=36463

Edited by Great_Satan (09/11/04 08:19 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: | 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: North Spore North Spore Mushroom Grow Kits & Cultivation Supplies   Original Sensible Seeds Bulk Cannabis Seeds   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Sporeworks.EU Spores for European Microscopy

General Interest > Political Discussion
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Kay: WMD never existed
( 1 2 3 all )		 Xlea321 3,991 41 02/15/04 12:35 AM
by The_Red_Crayon
* No humanitarian case for Iraq war Xlea321 1,045 2 01/30/04 02:02 AM
by Xlea321
* 75% Bush Backers Still Deluded About WMD & Saddam ekomstop 780 7 10/23/04 07:32 PM
by Divided_Sky
* WMD Intel: A Well-Designed Failure SquattingMarmot 334 0 01/24/05 01:57 AM
by SquattingMarmot
* Missing WMD's: FindLaw's Legal Commentary Edame 1,095 15 06/06/03 08:17 PM
by Edame
* US has ended search for WMD
( 1 2 all )		 Vvellum 1,448 39 01/13/05 11:59 PM
by 1stimer
* Bremer rejects Blair WMD claims Xlea321 895 7 12/30/03 01:12 AM
by Xlea321
* A year in the life of the WMD-ometer
( 1 2 all )		 Xlea321 1,998 26 07/30/04 11:38 PM
by Xlea321

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, ballsalsa
1,866 topic views. 1 members, 384 guests and 12 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.022 seconds spending 0.005 seconds on 15 queries.