Home | Community | Message Board


Sporeworks
Please support our sponsors.

General Interest >> Political Discussion

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!

Amazon Shop for: Agar, Petri Dish, Pressure Cooker, Scales, Vermiculite

Jump to first unread post. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 5 years, 8 months
Did the President Lie about Iraq?
    #4328095 - 06/23/05 12:48 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

http://www.gopusa.com/commentary/bobDid the President Lie about Iraq?

By Bobby Eberle

September 27, 2004

In every presidential campaign, there is an issue which rises to the surface and dominates the debate. In 1992, it was the economy. In 1980, it was inflation, unemployment and a tarnished national image. In 2004, it is the war on terror, and in particular, the Democrats are attempting to make this election a referendum on the war in Iraq. Time and time again, Democratic presidential nominee Sen. John Kerry has said his opponent has "misled" the American people on Iraq. At the Democratic National Convention, President Jimmy Carter made the same claim. DNC Chairman Terry McAuliffe has gone even further, saying that the president "lied" to the American people about weapons of mass destruction.

The question thus remains: did the president lie about Iraq?

Some time ago, while speaking from the Oval Office, the president looked into the eyes of the American public and said, "Earlier today, I ordered America's armed forces to strike military and security targets in Iraq. They are joined by British forces. Their mission is to attack Iraq's nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons programs and its military capacity to threaten its neighbors."

The president added that the purpose of this military action was "to protect the national interest of the United States, and indeed the interests of people throughout the Middle East and around the world." The president explained that Saddam Hussein "must not be allowed to threaten his neighbors or the world with nuclear arms, poison gas, or biological weapons."

During the course of his Oval Office address, the president said that other countries possess weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, but with Saddam, there is one big difference. "He has used them," the president said. "Not once, but repeatedly."

"Unleashing chemical weapons against Iranian troops during a decade-long war. Not only against soldiers, but against civilians, firing Scud missiles at the citizens of Israel, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain and Iran. And not only against a foreign enemy, but even against his own people, gassing Kurdish civilians in Northern Iraq," the president explained.

Setting an ominous tone, the president declared, "The international community had little doubt then, and I have no doubt today, that left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will use these terrible weapons again."

So... is the president lying? According to the Democrats, led by Sen. Kerry and Terry McAuliffe, because no weapons of mass destruction have been found, the president must be lying to the American public. It is the centerpiece of their presidential campaign. It doesn't seem to make a difference that information on Iraq's WMD program was supported by the CIA, Great Britain's MI6, and Russian Intelligence operatives. No, people simply compare the president's public statements and the lack of current WMDs as evidence that the president lied.

Continuing with our examination of the president's actual statements, the president noted that by working through the United Nations, "The UN Security Council voted 15 to zero to condemn Saddam's actions and to demand that he immediately come into compliance."

"I made it very clear at that time what unconditional cooperation meant, based on existing UN resolutions and Iraq's own commitments," the president said. "And along with Prime Minister Blair of Great Britain, I made it equally clear that if Saddam failed to cooperate fully, we would be prepared to act without delay, diplomacy or warning."

The president added, "This situation presents a clear and present danger to the stability of the Persian Gulf and the safety of people everywhere. The international community gave Saddam one last chance to resume cooperation with the weapons inspectors. Saddam has failed to seize the chance."

Based on these words, some Democrats may already be feeling that churning in their stomachs -- the feeling of a hawkish president building a misleading case against Iraq in order to rush the country to war. But before judgment is passed, a more complete review of the president's statements is in order.

In taking questions from reporters following his Oval Office address, the president was asked whether military action was the right thing to do. "This was the right thing for the country," the president said. "We have given Saddam Hussein chance after chance to cooperate. We said in November that this was the last chance. We acted swiftly because we were ready, thanks to the very fine work of the Defense Department in leaving our assets properly deployed. We had the strong support of the British."

In looking forward regarding the situation in Iraq, the president added, "I hope Saddam will come into cooperation with the inspection system now and comply with the relevant UN Security Council resolutions. But we have to be prepared that he will not, and we must deal with the very real danger he poses. So we will pursue a long-term strategy to contain Iraq and its weapons of mass destruction and work toward the day when Iraq has a government worthy of its people."

In talking about regime change, did the president "show his hand?" Did he want Saddam out of power simply for personal reasons, perhaps to the extent that he would lie to the American people about Iraq's weapons programs?

Regardless of the intelligence gathered and studied by American sources regarding Iraq's WMD programs and the fact that conclusions were supported by both British and Russian intelligence sources, the question still remains as to whether the president lied. Based on the strong and definitive statements cited here by the president, he must be called to account before the American people. The brave servicemen and women who are called into harm's way by the president of the United States must have confidence that their commander-in-chief is acting on credible information and not "lying" to the American public.

Thus, President Clinton, please come clean. Were you lying about Iraq and WMDs? The American people have a right to know.
by/2004/bobby_0927.shtml


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleGijith
Daisy Chain Eater

Registered: 12/04/03
Posts: 2,400
Loc: New York
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: lonestar2004]
    #4328102 - 06/23/05 12:49 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Why isn't this in the other thread?


--------------------
what's with neocons and the word 'ilk'?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 5 years, 8 months
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: Gijith]
    #4328117 - 06/23/05 12:52 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Read the article.

this article is about Clinton.


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSilversoul
Rhizome
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: lonestar2004]
    #4328129 - 06/23/05 12:54 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Here's my question: Did Saddam pose a threat to the US? If so, please present your case. If not, then why did we go into such a costly war?


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinelonestar2004
Live to party,work to affordit.
 User Gallery

Registered: 10/03/04
Posts: 8,978
Loc: South Texas
Last seen: 5 years, 8 months
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: Silversoul]
    #4328168 - 06/23/05 01:05 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

[url=http://hereisnewyork.org/index2.asp]http://hereisnewyor

What the headline from the report of the Special Advisor to the Director of Central Intelligence on Iraq's Weapons of Mass Destruction said: "No Evidence of Iraq Weapons."

What the body of the report (www.cia.gov) said:

? "Saddam's primary goal from 1991 to 2003 was to have U.N. sanctions lifted, while maintaining the security of the regime. He sought to balance the need to cooperate with U.N. inspections ? to gain support for lifting sanctions ? with his intention to preserve Iraq's intellectual capital for WMD with a minimum of foreign intrusiveness and loss of face."

? "The introduction of the Oil-For-Food program in late 1996 was a key turning point for the regime. OFF rescued Baghdad's economy from a terminal decline created by sanctions. The regime quickly came to see that OFF could be corrupted to acquire foreign exchange both to further undermine sanctions and to provide the means to enhance dual-use infrastructure and potential WMD-related development.

? "Saddam wanted to recreate Iraq's WMD capability ? which was essentially destroyed in 1991 ? after sanctions were removed and Iraq's economy stabilized. ... Saddam aspired to develop a nuclear capability ? in an incremental fashion, irrespective of international pressure and the resulting economic risks ? but he intended to focus on ballistic missile and tactical chemical warfare capabilities."

? "Continued oil smuggling efforts and the manipulation of the U.N. Oil-For-Food contracts emboldened Saddam to pursue his military reconstitution efforts starting in 1997 and peaking in 2001. These efforts covered arms, dual-use goods acquisition and some WMD-related programs."

? "Saddam directed the regime's key ministries and governmental agencies to devise and implement strategies, policies and techniques to discredit the U.N. sanctions, harass U.N. personnel in Iraq and discredit the U.S. At the same time, according to reporting, he also wanted to obfuscate Iraq's refusal to reveal the nature of its WMD and WMD-related programs, their capabilities and his intentions."

? "The Ministry of Foreign Affairs played a critical role in facilitating Iraq's procurement of military goods, dual-use goods pertaining to WMD, transporting cash and other valuable goods earned by illicit oil revenue, and forming and implementing a diplomatic strategy to end U.N. sanctions and the subsequent Oil-For-Food program by nefarious means."

? "Saddam never abandoned his intentions to resume a chemical weapons effort when sanctions were lifted and conditions judged favorable.

? "Depending on its scale, Iraq could have re-established an elementary biological weapons program within a few weeks to a few months of a decision to do so, but (investigators) discovered no indications that the regime was pursuing such a course... Iraq retained some biological weapons seed stocks until their discovery after Operation Iraqi Freedom."

Would the president have made different decisions had the report, made possible by the ouster of Saddam Hussein, been available before the ouster? Possibly.

Would leaving Saddam in place and relying on the U.N. and its sanctions to keep him in check have been a wise long-term strategy? Read past the headline and decide for yourself.

k.org/index2.asp[/url]


--------------------
America's debt problem is a "sign of leadership failure"

We have "reckless fiscal policies"

America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership.

Americans deserve better

Barack Obama


Edited by lonestar2004 (06/23/05 01:10 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSilversoul
Rhizome
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: lonestar2004]
    #4328177 - 06/23/05 01:08 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

What does New York or 9/11 have to do with Saddam?


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: Silversoul]
    #4328180 - 06/23/05 01:09 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

There are several things that bother me about the Iraq war. One of the big ones is the reason for going in and the aftermath. Yes, practically every intelligence agency on earth thought Saddam had WMD's. Yes, Saddam did not comply with the UN resolutions that were levied against him. Yes, Saddam was very hateful towards the U.S.

The main reason for going in was WMD's. No WMD's were found. The administration has not admitted that mistake (or any mistake).

Phred seems to be the only one who could be considered to be supportive of the military action against Iraq. So I will direct this question towards him -- Doesn't this bother you at all?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflinePhred
Fred's son
Male

Registered: 10/19/00
Posts: 12,949
Loc: Dominican Republic
Last seen: 1 year, 10 months
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #4328301 - 06/23/05 01:36 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Not in the slightest.

First of all, it is rubbish that the war was justified on WMDs alone. I challenge anyone to find a speech of Bush's on the subject of resuming hostilities with Iraq where at least several other reasons weren't given. I should note that this is far from the first time I have issued that challenge, by the way.

Secondly, the fate of the biochem stocks Hussein was known to still possess at the time the first UN inspection team withdrew from Iraq remains unknown. Even the infamous turncoat Scott Ritter has never attempted to claim that more than 90 to 95% (depending whether you read his written work and transcripts of TV interviews before he was bribed by Hussein or after) of these stocks were confirmed as destroyed. Where is the rest of it? No one knows. Hussein claims he destroyed it all, but he made similar claims earlier, then was shown to be a liar when new stocks were unearthed. His response? "Oh, yeah... forgot about that bit. But I swear by the beard of the prophet there are no more!" And let's not forget that Hussein still claims he is the president of Iraq. Nothing the man says can be accepted as fact.

Third, Hussein was required not just to destroy his existing stocks, but his WMD programs as well. Both the Blix and Duelfer reports show quite plainly he did no such thing. If you were busted for growing shrooms and part of the conditions of your probation was to ditch all your supply and your production materials, do you think you could get away with keeping prints, agar, petri dishes, syringes, vermiculite, pressure cookers, incubators with humidification systems, etc.? I don't think so. And note it takes around six weeks to produce shrooms from spore prints. You can whip up a batch of VX or Sarin in a lot less time than that.

But I have maintained all along that the primary reason for resuming hostilities was the continuing and blatant violation of the properly-signed agreement (the conditional cease-fire agreement) which temporarily suspended hostilities in 1991. I (and many others) said at the time it was a mistake not to have marched to Baghdad and ended things correctly then and there rather than agreeing to a ceasefire, but unfortunately we don't have a Wayback machine to go back and change that decision, so it boiled down to a question of whether we should set a precedent for other nutbars follow -- invade whoever you feel like whenever you feel like it and all that will happen to you is that the mighty UN will periodically aim some scary "frown-beams" in your direction whenever they are reluctantly goaded into doing so by the international amnesty folks. The fact of the matter is that Hussein hoodwinked the entire world and laughed about it. And that's before the world knew just how much crap was going on with the massively corrupt Oil for Food program and Russian and French arms manufacturers supplying him with spare parts and maintenance gear for his arsenal in direct violation of the international embargo, remember.

Others have leaned more on the humanitarian part of things. There's no question that what Hussein (the biggest mass murderer of Muslims of this century and probably of all time) was doing far outstrips (in hideousness if not in absolute numbers) the atrocities in Rwanda, for example. At least the Rwandans were hacked to death relatively quickly rather than being tortured and raped in a long drawn out process. But I myself have never relied on the humanitarian aspect of the question. Tough beans for those who are caught in such a situation as Darfur or Rwanda or Uganda or Bosnia or Iraq -- that's their problem, not the problem of the US. But that's just me. if you wish to add Hussein's undeniable human rights atrocities into the mix I have no objection.



Phred


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 3 months, 16 days
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: Phred]
    #4328328 - 06/23/05 01:42 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Though both were terrible events, the slaughter of the Kurds in Iraq can't even be compared in number or treatment of the Tutsi's (and moderate Hutu's) in Rwanda.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinebarfightlard
tales of theinexpressible
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 8,670
Loc: Canoodia
Last seen: 6 years, 11 months
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: Redstorm]
    #4328337 - 06/23/05 01:47 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Oh, did the US not back the slaughtering in Rwanda, like they did the Kurds?


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

"What business is it of yours what I do, read, buy, see, say, think, who I fuck, what I take into my body - as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet?" - Bill Hicks


Edited by bellylard (06/23/05 01:47 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 3 months, 16 days
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: barfightlard]
    #4328342 - 06/23/05 01:48 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Nope, but just like everyone else in the world, we didn't help.

Theres no pointing fingers when talking about Rwanda, b/c everyone is to blame.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: Phred]
    #4328361 - 06/23/05 01:51 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Phred said:
First of all, it is rubbish that the war was justified on WMDs alone.





But, you must admit that the WMD's were one of the big reasons, if not the main reason given for going in.


Quote:

Phred said:
But I have maintained all along that the primary reason for resuming hostilities was the continuing and blatant violation of the properly-signed agreement (the conditional cease-fire agreement) which temporarily suspended hostilities in 1991.





Do you think certain members of the Bush administration were thinking of any geo-political concerns when it came to taking out Saddam? Do you think that they might have been salivating at the thought of reducing American reliance upon Saudi Arabia for example?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinebarfightlard
tales of theinexpressible
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 8,670
Loc: Canoodia
Last seen: 6 years, 11 months
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: Phred]
    #4328386 - 06/23/05 01:58 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

Phred said:First of all, it is rubbish that the war was justified on WMDs alone.




Have you wrote to your government asking why your country hasn't invaded North Korea, Israel, or Iran yet????


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

"What business is it of yours what I do, read, buy, see, say, think, who I fuck, what I take into my body - as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet?" - Bill Hicks


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 3 months, 16 days
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: barfightlard]
    #4328394 - 06/23/05 02:00 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

You do realize that if we did that, your country would see some of the nuclear fallout meant for us, right?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinebarfightlard
tales of theinexpressible
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 8,670
Loc: Canoodia
Last seen: 6 years, 11 months
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: Redstorm]
    #4328403 - 06/23/05 02:03 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

So you saying that Irag never was a threat then.


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

"What business is it of yours what I do, read, buy, see, say, think, who I fuck, what I take into my body - as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet?" - Bill Hicks


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleRandalFlagg
Stranger
Registered: 06/15/02
Posts: 15,608
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #4328410 - 06/23/05 02:03 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Here are some more questions for Phred:

Do you view the effort in Iraq as being spawned by 9/11 but not related to it? By this I mean does Iraq have nothing to do with the war on fundamentalist Islam, but we will use 9/11 as a catalyst to take people out who are hostile to us? Or do you view Iraq as being a key part in the fight against militant Islam?

Did it bother you that the Bush adminstration is afraid to tell the American people why Muslims really hate the U.S.? Bush never admits that they hate the U.S. because of our support for Israel, our support for unpopular Arab regimes, or our troops being in Arab countries. He gives reasons like, "they hate us for our freedoms". This is a lie. Does it bother you that he lies about this?


Edited by RandalFlagg (06/23/05 03:02 PM)


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 3 months, 16 days
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: barfightlard]
    #4328411 - 06/23/05 02:04 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Where the hell did I even hint at that?


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
InvisibleSilversoul
Rhizome
Male User Gallery

Registered: 01/01/05
Posts: 23,576
Loc: The Barricades
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: barfightlard]
    #4328412 - 06/23/05 02:04 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Quote:

bellylard said:
So you saying that Irag never was a threat then.



I'm saying that, unless someone can convince me otherwise.


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


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Offlinebarfightlard
tales of theinexpressible
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 01/29/03
Posts: 8,670
Loc: Canoodia
Last seen: 6 years, 11 months
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: Redstorm]
    #4328421 - 06/23/05 02:05 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Well those countrys I listed are "threats" to you yet you wouldn't invade them, but you did Iraq, so your government was either putting millions of americans lives at risk because of a potential nuclear strike or there was no threat at all.


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

"What business is it of yours what I do, read, buy, see, say, think, who I fuck, what I take into my body - as long as I do not harm another human being on this planet?" - Bill Hicks


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
OfflineRedstorm
Prince of Bugs
Male

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 10/08/02
Posts: 44,174
Last seen: 3 months, 16 days
Re: Did the President Lie about Iraq? [Re: RandalFlagg]
    #4328426 - 06/23/05 02:06 PM (11 years, 5 months ago)

Theres no way we could be invading Iraq to fight militant Islam. Iraq is one of the most secular (or at least moderate) Muslim countries in the Middle East. I think Bush just took advantage of wide support after 9/11 and took out Saddam.


Post Extras: Print Post  Remind Me! Notify Moderator
Jump to top. Pages: 1 | 2 | 3 | Next >  [ show all ]

Amazon Shop for: Agar, Petri Dish, Pressure Cooker, Scales, Vermiculite

General Interest >> Political Discussion

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* CIA chief: Iraq wasn't imminent threat Learyfan 1,162 13 02/07/04 03:45 AM
by Xlea321
* Remarks by Vice President Cheney on the War on Terror lonestar2004 927 13 11/26/05 12:50 AM
by gregorio
* Iraq: How we can bring our troops home - American Dissidents Voice The14thWarrior 412 0 10/11/05 02:06 PM
by The14thWarrior
* George Bush In Iraq
( 1 2 3 all )
pattern 2,464 57 12/04/03 08:43 PM
by Phred
* Bush ratings tumble as Iraq civil war beckons Alex213 852 12 08/29/05 06:14 PM
by zappaisgod
* Blix: Iraq had no WMD since 1991
( 1 2 3 4 5 6 all )
Xlea321 3,750 106 09/23/03 05:43 PM
by infidelGOD
* Iraq is battlefield for war vs. terror wingnutx 574 4 08/25/03 01:58 PM
by Dava
* 43 Attacks on Americans in Iraq Yesterday
( 1 2 all )
Zahid 1,515 24 10/30/03 06:46 PM
by PsiloKitten

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Prisoner#1, Enlil
3,428 topic views. 1 members, 3 guests and 4 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Toggle Favorite | Print Topic | Stats ]
Search this thread:
Lil Shop Of Spores
Please support our sponsors.

Copyright 1997-2016 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.112 seconds spending 0.007 seconds on 16 queries.