Did anyone just see that Obama speech?

[theNoseBleedKid]

I'm sorry. I'm not engaging you if you persist lying about WMD. Up to this point I was happy engaging you. This is fact. Your wrong. That's how it is. Theres no argument, nothing to debate. Many countries diagreed with US on this issue.

 

[Marshall Freak]

I'm sorry. I'm not engaging you if you persist lying about WMD. Up to this point I was happy engaging you. This is fact. Your wrong. That's how it is. Theres no argument, nothing to debate. Many countries diagreed with US on this issue.

Bullshit. There was never a debate about whether he had them or not, it was about how to disarm him. That's why there were inspectors. That's a fact, no argument, nothing to debate. Many countries did disagree, but it was about how to proceed, not if we should proceed or not. Go read up about the 13 unanimous UN Sanctions telling him to disarm. Stop trying to rewrite history.

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

That's why there were inspectors

IF WE WERE SO SURE WHY WHERE INSPECTORS NEEDED?

Where are they MF? Where are the weapons? Where are the devices to doom as all in Iraq? IF we were so certain how some the US was condemmed by the UN and many countries for going in? Un even called the invasion illegal.

Answer, there aren't any, there wasn't any. The premise of the war was flawed. Show me the evidence of there being WMD in Iraq and I'll gladly admit I'm wrong and your right. But there isn't and won't be any.


Straight from Wiki, you don't even have to go further;

At the start of the war, U.S. officials argued that Iraq and its alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed an imminent threat to the interest of the United States, Europe and the other nations of the Middle East. The intelligence was supported by British intelligence , as well as given tacit support by Russian and German intelligence.. But the intelligence was also criticized by others.and weapons inspectors found no evidence of WMD. After the invasion, the Iraq Survey Group concluded that Iraq had ended its WMD programs in 1991 and had no active programs at the time of the invasion, but that they intended to resume production if and when the Iraq sanctions were lifted. Although some earlier degraded remnants of misplaced or abandoned WMD were found, they were not the weapons for which the coalition invaded.

Great - a war for a presumption of something that might possibly happen in the future if and when the UN removed a sanction presuming Saddam was still in power and the resources to produce WMD were still there.

Quite a far cry from "THEY HAVE WMD AND WE WERE RIGHT TO INVADE"

Many countries did disagree, but it was about how to proceed, not if we should proceed or not

This statement is completely false. France openly opposed war. One example, top of my head.

This isn't a question of opinion any more MF, this is pure fact. Your argument has about as much merit as me trying to argue gravity doesn't exist. That's how it is.

 

[Marshall Freak]

That's why there were inspectors

IF WE WERE SO SURE WHY WHERE INSPECTORS NEEDED?

Where are they MF? Where are the weapons? Where are the devices to doom as all in Iraq? IF we were so certain how some the US was condemmed by the UN and many countries for going in? Un even called the invasion illegal.

Answer, there aren't any, there wasn't any. The premise of the war was flawed. Show me the evidence of there being WMD in Iraq and I'll gladly admit I'm wrong and your right. But there isn't and won't be any.


Straight from Wiki, you don't even have to go further;

At the start of the war, U.S. officials argued that Iraq and its alleged weapons of mass destruction (WMD) posed an imminent threat to the interest of the United States, Europe and the other nations of the Middle East. The intelligence was supported by British intelligence , as well as given tacit support by Russian and German intelligence.. But the intelligence was also criticized by others.and weapons inspectors found no evidence of WMD. After the invasion, the Iraq Survey Group concluded that Iraq had ended its WMD programs in 1991 and had no active programs at the time of the invasion, but that they intended to resume production if and when the Iraq sanctions were lifted. Although some earlier degraded remnants of misplaced or abandoned WMD were found, they were not the weapons for which the coalition invaded.

Great - a war for a presumption of something that might possibly happen in the future if and when the UN removed a sanction presuming Saddam was still in power and the resources to produce WMD were still there.

Quite a far cry from "THEY HAVE WMD AND WE WERE RIGHT TO INVADE"

Many countries did disagree, but it was about how to proceed, not if we should proceed or not

This statement is completely false. France openly opposed war. One example, top of my head.

This isn't a question of opinion any more MF, this is pure fact. Your argument has about as much merit as me trying to argue gravity doesn't exist. That's how it is.

In that same Wiki article, it talked about not only the Plutonium we removed, but listed the different types of Chemical weapons that he was KNOWN to have used, the quantities that he was known to have that were not accounted, for plus the thousands of pounds that he himself claimed to have in the mid 90s. It's intellectually dishonest to over look those facts and then present an argument of what was concluded after the invasion. end of story.

France openly opposed war as well as Russia and China. Like I said, they believed he had weapons, but wanted to go about it differently. I never said everyone thought we should go to war, I said everyone believed he had WMD's. That's not a question of opinion THAT is pure fact.

 

[duesentrieb]

If I remember correctly all countries minus 30 opposed the war.

 

[Marshall Freak]

If I remember correctly all countries minus 30 opposed the war.

And the countries that opposed it believed he had them, but wanted to impose sanctions etc instead of going to war.

I'm not trying to convince anyone that it was or wasn't the right thing to do, but I'm being called a liar for stating that the world intelligence (Which did for the most part ended up being wrong) was that he had them and was making them. Where the disagreement was on how to handle it and how to proceed.

 

[CharFace]

 

[cloudnine]

psychodave, how can you say Bush's administration "wasn't that bad"? My God, the economy is in shambles, you're in an unwinnable war, and progressive causes in almost every area have been set back 10 years. Yes, 9/11 would be a horrible thing for anyone to deal with - but instead of using it as a way to unite everyone in a common cause, they just used it as carte blanche to further their own agenda.

Who wrote this? Show me how the economy is in shambles. Give me details. Please keep in mind that I work in finance and manage almost 6 BILLION in assets. I understand the economy.

The dollar is worth less and less. The only reason it hasn't fallen even further is because places like China hold vast amounts of US dollars and they don't want to see their investments be worth nothing. The national debt has skyrocketed, personal debt has increased astronomically, the subprime mortgage thing is a disaster (regardless of personal responsibility in this area, it is a huge problem), etcetera, etcetera.

Also, I don't believe Bush was malicious in his response to 9/11 - he just had no fucking clue what to do, since he's woefully inadequate as a leader. I feel for the guy; he's hopeless, but he got suckered into the job and has been used as a tool of others for his entire presidency. I don't think he's an evil guy at all.

 

[duesentrieb]

Oh no - not my election (although I am somehow affected: both parties are asking my country to give more money for Iraq and to send even more own soldiers to Afghanistan), and for a euro-lefty like myself even a liberal US dude is way to far on the right side of the spectrum

 

[tweed]

[No message]

 

[FUZZboat]

MAKE AMERICA STRONG AGAIN !!!

Put South America(& Mexico) out of Business = semi-Legalize Drugs !

Put the Middle East out of Business = Drill for Alaskan OIL Today !!

Put Asian Continents out of Business = Stop Importing everything - Keep Manufacturing in the USA !!


Final Note: does anyone remember this little tid bit in headlines Sept. 6, 2006 ??

Oil companies see big Gulf of Mexico discovery
Tests suggest huge oil field found in deep waters

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14678206/

Well, WTF has become of that ??? The news media was portraying it
as if we had our own little saudi oil field off the coast of Florida !!

"FREE OIL FOR EVERYONE !!!"

Its curious that the media hasn't said word 1 about that oil find since it was annouced in 20006 !!

OH thats right - Chevron just sold the drilling rights in the Gulf of Mexico to CUBA, CHINA and a few other foreign countries !!

http://www.glennbeck.com/content/articles/article/198/9828/
(I hate to post a glenn beck url but again very strange that I can't find this info anywhere else being reported - its almost like the oil companies want it to remain a secret and keep us paying $4 maybe$6 maybe even$10 at the pump !!)

flame away !!

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

In that same Wiki article, it talked about not only the Plutonium we removed, but listed the different types of Chemical weapons that he was KNOWN to have used, the quantities that he was known to have that were not accounted, for plus the thousands of pounds that he himself claimed to have in the mid 90s. It's intellectually dishonest to over look those facts and then present an argument of what was concluded after the invasion. end of story.

France openly opposed war as well as Russia and China. Like I said, they believed he had weapons, but wanted to go about it differently. I never said everyone thought we should go to war, I said everyone believed he had WMD's. That's not a question of opinion THAT is pure fact.

Your ignoring that the Chemical weapons weren't enough to meet the justification of war, neither were any of the flimsy claims made by governments in support of it.

Again I'd ask for your evidence that there are or were WMD - the article states that Iraq had potential to create chemical weapons. Potential. Australia has potential to maufacture massive nucleur weapons in a short time, your not warring with us.

No evidence France beleived there were weapons. Your not backing the claim of beleif up at all, an article, some evidence?

Look at the number of dishonest, misleading, and often plain wrong statements made by the US government and intelligence. Even relatively unbiased Wikipedia states there are close to 1000 'facts' that were incorrect made publically by George Bush and his administration pertaining to the Iraw war.

Read the whole thing, it's obviously a sham, there are no weapons. The premise of the war was false, the thing is a shambles. Stop making excuses.

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

If I remember correctly all countries minus 30 opposed the war.

And the countries that opposed it believed he had them, but wanted to impose sanctions etc instead of going to war.

I'm not trying to convince anyone that it was or wasn't the right thing to do, but I'm being called a liar for stating that the world intelligence (Which did for the most part ended up being wrong) was that he had them and was making them. Where the disagreement was on how to handle it and how to proceed.

I didn't read this before posting my retort. My fault.

I think you need to aknowledge that the war was fought on false pretences and that failed to meet its aims. In the case America was wrong.

World intelligence though? The UN repeatably said their inspectors had found no WMD's come on man, get real.

 

[ttosh]

If only we could find some people from North Korea and China to help tell us how our country should be run, and how to fix our healthcare, homeless, drug issues, etc.. this post would get real interesting.

 

[SFW]

I refuse to vote for a man who will not participate in the Pledge of Allegience or stand for our Nation Anthem. If you cannot say it with conviction or raise to respect the men and women who fought for your right to run, then you are not fit to lead this great nation. Period! I'm not a big fan of McCain, but I sure as hell won't vote for Obama. Too many people are caught up in the whole race thing... take away the color of his skin and ask yourself if you'd still be voting for him? I will vote for the candidate whom I believe has the most, and best experience and qualifications for the highest office in the land.

 

[theNoseBleedKid]

If only we could find some people from North Korea and China to help tell us how our country should be run, and how to fix our healthcare, homeless, drug issues, etc.. this post would get real interesting.

I'm not Chinese, but many people I'm at University with are Chinese, or Singaporean International students.

Almost universally they beleive stricter government regulation is a much better thing than the opposite. I'm not sure how they feel about things like censorship etc, but as far as crime, homelessness, health I know they all prefer China to Western countries.

There may be a few exceptions to this. I'm simply going on the conversations I've had.

 

[degenaro]

major snippage!................

When someone from another country ignorantly tells me that people are starving and that 1/10 of the population are homeless, it's apparant they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground, and need to just mind their own business if they're going to interject such stupidity.

You know I was gonna stay out of this...but I gotta grab this one.
The statement from an American about other folks minding their own business is amusing at best. Seems to me that America as whole has an issue with minding their own business when it comes to foreign policy.
You really think America needs to police the rest of the world.Silly me, here I thought that was what the UN was for.
Korea, Vietnam, Cuba/Cold War, Eastern Europe, Afghansitan, Gulf Wars...you really think America has a valid reason to be there?

And on another note why is it that Socialism gets the same tretment ta used to be reserved for Communism?

 

[badger71]

In the immortal words of Sgt. Hulka: Lighten up Francis.

We'll all see what happens come November.

 

[degenaro]

Oh no - not my election (although I am somehow affected: both parties are asking my country to give more money for Iraq and to send even more own soldiers to Afghanistan), and for a euro-lefty like myself even a liberal US dude is way to far on the right side of the spectrum

Dude, a Euro conservative is left of a US liberal...

 

[grooveHT]

In that same Wiki article, it talked about not only the Plutonium we removed, but listed the different types of Chemical weapons that he was KNOWN to have used, the quantities that he was known to have that were not accounted, for plus the thousands of pounds that he himself claimed to have in the mid 90s. It's intellectually dishonest to over look those facts and then present an argument of what was concluded after the invasion. end of story.

France openly opposed war as well as Russia and China. Like I said, they believed he had weapons, but wanted to go about it differently. I never said everyone thought we should go to war, I said everyone believed he had WMD's. That's not a question of opinion THAT is pure fact.

Your ignoring that the Chemical weapons weren't enough to meet the justification of war, neither were any of the flimsy claims made by governments in support of it.

Again I'd ask for your evidence that there are or were WMD - the article states that Iraq had potential to create chemical weapons. Potential. Australia has potential to maufacture massive nucleur weapons in a short time, your not warring with us.

No evidence France beleived there were weapons. Your not backing the claim of beleif up at all, an article, some evidence?

Look at the number of dishonest, misleading, and often plain wrong statements made by the US government and intelligence. Even relatively unbiased Wikipedia states there are close to 1000 'facts' that were incorrect made publically by George Bush and his administration pertaining to the Iraw war.

Read the whole thing, it's obviously a sham, there are no weapons. The premise of the war was false, the thing is a shambles. Stop making excuses.

Just something to provoke more speculation...in recent years, who was the biggest supplier of Iraqi military goods? France and Russia. I've seen the T-72s, Mi-24s, Mi-8s and 17s, Dassault Mirages, AK-47s, BRMDs, BMPs, and the gamut of their goods with my own eyes. So if France and Russia moved against a cash cow of theirs like Iraq with direct military action, they would be jeopardizing their own interests, so them petitioning for other measures, like a severe letter writing campaign, makes complete sense. In other words, my suggestion here is that the validity of the U.N. is compromised by the same thing that compromises our lawmakers: self interest and the almighty dollar/ruple/euro. Therefore I would consider it a sham to use the U.N. as a watermark, like well the U.N. didn't vote for military action so it must not be valid.