As things now stand, Bush is left with only one argument and justification for having launched a war that has cost 1,000 lives, $150 billion and whatever goodwill America had won in the aftermath of 9/11. His last-resort reason: Saddam Hussein might
havedeveloped weapons that he
might
havegiven to terrorists that might
attackthe United States.
And even that reasoning is undermined by the new report of the Iraq Survey Group, which says that Saddam's capacities, whatever they might have been, were withering, not "gathering," under the weight of inspections.
well, well, welll!!!!! NKorea, and Iran have done much worse in every respect........wmds, proliferation, and terroriiiiiiists galore! Now, let us see how many Repubs will send their friends and kids to wage war on Iran and NKorea. May be bush’’s daughters will each land in Iran and NKorea and with the help of Jesus, change the regime in those countries.
While Bush was obsessing about phantom weapons programs in Iraq, his ally Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan was pretending not to see the regional swap meet through which A.Q. Khan was peddling nuclear weapons materials to regimes such as North Korea, Iran, Libya —— even Burma.
Now it appears North Korea, and soon Iran, will have become nuclear powers on this president's watch.
MNot you silly! The other patriot who says all Democrats are America haters.
Â
Now coming back to you...you are using this silly tactic of asking a question when you can't answer a question. That proves that you are stuck somewhere very uncomfortable.
Â
Now before I say GNite....once more. Principle and consistencyyyyyyyy....shouldn't you and your Dick and Bush wage war on those thir world countries with deadly wmds?
Â
Yes or no will do.
Â
G'Nite!
Â
I know you won't answer because you are stuck somewhere soooooo deep and dark.
Typical. Cut and run. Go back and look Abdul. I asked you a question after your first post in which no questions were asked by you. You can't answer it either out of some deficiancy or dishonesty.
I'll answer your question though. As a last resort, we should go to war with Iran & N Korea
Agreed.
How about 12 years of resolutions first? We could even get Kofi to set up an oil for food program. Then they can write a harshly toned letter to Iran and North Korea that'd do it. Or we could follow the Kerry plan and sell Iran nuclear fuel in return for a promise that we get to monitor it. That's a good idea too. Giving them the material would save the Mullah's some time. Then we could get rid of nuke bunker busters because we'd never need those. Well that is,if there was say nuclear weapons bunkers in Iran and we needed to take them out..........Wait, oh, nevermind.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Oct 7, 2004 at 07:57pm.]
Don't know. I can't predict the future. Personally I think there's enough pressure from outside and inside those countries and they both have major internal problems. I see uprisings in both countries. Iran more than North Korea. The Iranians can taste what the Iraqis are on the verge of. Their student democracy movement is huge over there. Beleive it or not they respect America and want our help. If it doesn't collapse internally I wouldn't be suprised to see Israel take out their reactors like they did to Saddam's.
As for N.K I think he'll collapse under his own weight. If not who knows.
Well, when you go after the enemy, you hit the softest spot first. Iraq. The others later, if you have to. Besides, Iraq was unfinished business -- the Gulf War was never really over.
Rob, that article you linked to said something I've read other places too -- stability in the Middle East isn't necessarily a good thing. Not with the current status quo. A democratic Iraq is a huge threat to Iran and Syria. It would also give impetus to the brewing unrest in Iran. And other Arab countries have indeed been talking up reforms.
A democratic Iraq is a huge threat to Iran and Syria. It would also give impetus to the brewing unrest in Iran. And other Arab countries have indeed been talking up reforms.
If Syria suddenly finds itself surrounded by democracies or even benevolent non sectarin leaders it's harder for them the hold power.
And it's going to get hotter before it gets cooler. The guys in power won't go down easily. The UN will get meaner. Europe will, too. Bush can stand up to that but I doubt Kerry would.
The Dems really picked the wrong candidate this time.
I don't agree with many things that Bush has done believe it or not. I think the UN has proven itself useless and corrupt. They'll stand by in places they're needed. Dafur, Syria and even Iraq and a myriad of other places. They pulled stakes when they were attacked. The very thing they're supposed to do they don't. It's a beaureucratic nightmare that has ceased to be usefull due to their own inaction. Turning the keys over to them would be as usefull as hips on a snake. Kerry will bring France and Germany on board though, oh wait.
His last-resort reason: Saddam Hussein might havedeveloped weapons that he
might havegiven to terrorists that might attackthe United States.
That was one of the reason for going, that he might have these things, develop worse ones and his ties to terrorist made it possible to pass them on. As you remember from the U.N. resolutions it was Saddam's duty to show that he got rid of them, not ours to show that he had them. With all the gaps between what he admitted to having and showed that he got rid of, he did not pass that test.
It is a little stronger than just a might. According to the unfinished report
(link)
:
Saddam wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when sanctions were lifted.
Iraq’s decisions in 1996 to accept the Oil-For-Food program (OFF) and later in 1998 to cease cooperation with UNSCOM and IAEA spurred a period of increased activity in delivery systems development.
By 2002, Iraq had provided the liquid-propellant Al Samud II—a program started in 2001—and the solidpropellant Al Fat’h to the military and was pursuing a series of new small UAV systems.
ISG uncovered Iraqi plans or designs for three long-range ballistic missiles with ranges from 400 to 1,000 km and for a 1,000-km-range cruise missile, although none of these systems progressed to production and only one reportedly passed the design phase. ISG assesses that these plans demonstrate Saddam’s continuing desire—up to the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)—for a long-range delivery capability.
Given Iraq’s investments in technology and infrastructure improvements, an effective procurement network, skilled scientists, and designs already on the books for longer range missiles, ISG assesses that Saddam clearly intended to reconstitute long-range delivery systems and that the systems potentially were for WMD.
Saddam did express his intent to retain the intellectual capital developed during the Iraqi Nuclear Program. Senior Iraqis—several of them from the Regime’s inner circle—told ISG they assumed Saddam would restart a nuclear program once UN sanctions ended.
Saddam never abandoned his intentions to resume a CW effort when sanctions were lifted and conditions were judged favorable
Iraq constructed a number of new plants starting in the mid-1990s that enhanced its chemical infrastructure, although its overall industry had not fully recovered from the effects of sanctions, and had not regained pre-1991 technical sophistication or production capabilities prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom
Uday—head of the Fedayeen Saddam—attempted to obtain chemical weapons for use during OIF (Operation Iraqi Freedom), according to reporting
Pretty damning report wouldn't you admit? Would you prefer that we waited until sanctions were lifted and Saddam had followed through on his wishes? Do you realize how many of our soldiers and civilians would have died if we had done just that?
In answer to your question about if we should invade Iran and North Korea, now is not the time for that. We are working with a bilateral group of nations on talks with North Korea even though Kerry wishes that we go it alone on that one.
We are also trying to get the U.N. to do something with Iran. They need to pass sanctions, get inspections and such. We should give them time like we did in Iraq. You do know that Saddam farted around with the U.N. for 12 years don't you?
If these things fail or appear to be getting out of hand, then will be the time to use our full force to protect ourselves. It would be a lot easier and cost a lot less human lives if we do it before they have the capabilities to inflict massive damage.
These countries did not become a problem because of president Bush. They started all this under the watchfull eyes of then president Clinton.
We need to keep an eye on the the U.N. and hold them accountable as well. It was just reported that a
UN inspector 'took £60,000 ($106,939.74 USD) in Iraq bribes'.
Except that Iran may be only a matter of months away from having a nuke, and they already have the missiles to carry one. All the UN ever does is give them time to do whatever they want to do anyway.
Israel will do something if we don't. THAT kind of instability the Middle East does NOT need. They got away with it in Iraq in the '80s but they won't this time. It'll be all the Arab states attacking Israel again, and we'll get into it.
Except that Iran may be only a matter of months away from having a nuke, and they already have the missiles to carry one. All the UN ever does is give them time to do whatever they want to do anyway.
Israel will do something if we don't. THAT kind of instability the MIddle East does NOT need. They got away with it in Iraq in the '80s but they won't this time. It'll be all the Arab states attacking Israel again, and we'll get into it.
WASHINGTON Â— Federal law enforcement authorities notified school districts in six states last month that a computer disc found in Iraq contained photos, floor plans and other information about their schools, two U.S. officials said Thursday.
Israel will do something if we don't. THAT kind of instability the Middle East does NOT need. They got away with it in Iraq in the '80s but they won't this time.It'll be all the Arab states attacking Israel again, and we'll get into it.
It is sad, and too bad... But it won't work...because they do not WANT us to win, not in that way. They want to set up a government under the teachings of Allah, or Islam, and that is their right. Will WEallow them to have that sort of Government? NO... Not with GDubbya in office.
Iraq will do what they want because we need an ally in the Iraqi government. And Bush won't even try to prevent it.
So it will fail...all the dead and wounded, all the damage done to our international standing and all the bullshit Gdubbya has said otherwise, still it will come out the SAME, a Theocracy. Not a "D emocracy".
It will all fail if Kerry is elected. He is a spineless fellow.
might
havedeveloped weapons that he
might
havegiven to terrorists that
might
attackthe United States.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6200854/
well, well, welll!!!!! NKorea, and Iran have done much worse in every respect........wmds, proliferation, and terroriiiiiiists galore! Now, let us see how many Repubs will send their friends and kids to wage war on Iran and NKorea. May be bush’’s daughters will each land in Iran and NKorea and with the help of Jesus, change the regime in those countries.
So you want us to go to war with them too ?
While Bush was obsessing about phantom weapons programs in Iraq, his ally Pervez Musharraf in Pakistan was pretending not to see the regional swap meet through which A.Q. Khan was peddling nuclear weapons materials to regimes such as North Korea, Iran, Libya —— even Burma.
Now it appears North Korea, and soon Iran, will have become nuclear powers on this president's watch.
http://the.honoluluadvertiser.com/article/2004/Oct/07/op/op03p.html
oh, so you don't want to, even though they fullfill all the criteria (and more) set by the supreeeeeme commmaaaander and Dick?
Do you want us to invade them too?
No, I never said I didn't. I asked you a question.
Bush and Dick and all his supporters (you too may be) were so much on principle and and and and consistency.....right? now let us see all of that.Â
Â
That is what I am trying to find out......not some silly war on some third world country.
That is what I am trying to find out......not some silly war on some third world country.
Silly! trying to evade my question and comes back with a question.
Â
Now answer my post first. Principle and consistencyyyyyyy.......shouldn't your Dick and Bush wage war on those countries?Â
Forget it Rob. Just another America hating crackpot.
Â
how silly! I said that in my post and this person tries to reeducate me....gee!
Instead of answeriing, another patriot comes from nowhere and calls me names.
Â
oki patriots.....QUESTION
Â
Principle and consistencyyyyyyy......wage war or not? Simple question. YES or NO will do.
Â
Â
Â
Â
oki patriots.....QUESTION
Â
Principle and consistencyyyyyyy......wage war or not? Simple question. YES or NO will do.
You answer a simple question first. Should we attack them too Yes or No will do.
[Edited by on Oct 7, 2004 at 07:28pm.]
Your name is Duane Johnson and you're posting from a slum apartment above a bar in the Bronx.
I've been here for years, brainiac.
Take a hike, Akbar.
MNot you silly! The other patriot who says all Democrats are America haters.
Â
Now coming back to you...you are using this silly tactic of asking a question when you can't answer a question. That proves that you are stuck somewhere very uncomfortable.
Â
Now before I say GNite....once more. Principle and consistencyyyyyyyy....shouldn't you and your Dick and Bush wage war on those thir world countries with deadly wmds?
Â
Yes or no will do.
Â
G'Nite!
Â
I know you won't answer because you are stuck somewhere soooooo deep and dark.
Â
Tata!
C'mon Abdul. I asked you a question first. It's not a tough one.
oh, this spatriot can't answer and he says take a hike!
Â
Duane.
Typical. Cut and run. Go back and look Abdul. I asked you a question after your first post in which no questions were asked by you. You can't answer it either out of some deficiancy or dishonesty.
[Edited by on Oct 7, 2004 at 07:33pm.]
Before I leave.
LuvFly
Please read my first post which asks a question in a subtle way. Please answer today and I will come back later to check. You have a nice day!
Â
tata! now!
deficiancy or dishonesty.
It was a statement. I asked first. Try again. Enjoy your Coke.
Notice how Akbar drags out the letters of certain words? Fold used to do the same thing a long time ago.????????????????????
Come on Abdul, he asked you the first question.
I'll answer your question though. As a last resort, we should go to war with Iran & N Korea.
Notice how Akbar drags out the letters of certain words? Fold used to do the same thing a long time ago.????????????????????
Fold's not that creative.
[Edited by on Oct 7, 2004 at 07:48pm.]
heh
I'll answer your question though. As a last resort, we should go to war with Iran & N Korea
Agreed.
How about 12 years of resolutions first? We could even get Kofi to set up an oil for food program. Then they can write a harshly toned letter to Iran and North Korea that'd do it. Or we could follow the Kerry plan and sell Iran nuclear fuel in return for a promise that we get to monitor it. That's a good idea too. Giving them the material would save the Mullah's some time. Then we could get rid of nuke bunker busters because we'd never need those. Well that is,if there was say nuclear weapons bunkers in Iran and we needed to take them out..........Wait, oh, nevermind.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Oct 7, 2004 at 07:57pm.]
I did a search, and Abdul Qadir has been around for a long time.
PFID#: efa82da
Number of posts: 6357
She's just now finally made it to our corner of PF.
[Edited 2 times. Most recently by on Oct 7, 2004 at 07:57pm.]
She's just now finally made it to our corner of PF.
Are you sure it is a she, JT?
wow.... I just looked at the number of posts I've made. Some of you have some catching up to do. ;)
[Edited by on Oct 7, 2004 at 08:31pm.]
Anyone think the Bush people are planning to take out Iran and North Korea in the second term?
If, for no other reason, than they can?
[Edited by on Oct 7, 2004 at 08:29pm.]
Don't know. I can't predict the future. Personally I think there's enough pressure from outside and inside those countries and they both have major internal problems. I see uprisings in both countries. Iran more than North Korea. The Iranians can taste what the Iraqis are on the verge of. Their student democracy movement is huge over there. Beleive it or not they respect America and want our help. If it doesn't collapse internally I wouldn't be suprised to see Israel take out their reactors like they did to Saddam's.
As for N.K I think he'll collapse under his own weight. If not who knows.
If, for no other reason, than they can?Â
Well, when you go after the enemy, you hit the softest spot first. Iraq. The others later, if you have to. Besides, Iraq was unfinished business -- the Gulf War was never really over.
Rob, that article you linked to said something I've read other places too -- stability in the Middle East isn't necessarily a good thing. Not with the current status quo. A democratic Iraq is a huge threat to Iran and Syria. It would also give impetus to the brewing unrest in Iran. And other Arab countries have indeed been talking up reforms.
Muskwa 10/7/04 8:49pm
A democratic Iraq is a huge threat to Iran and Syria. It would also give impetus to the brewing unrest in Iran. And other Arab countries have indeed been talking up reforms.
If Syria suddenly finds itself surrounded by democracies or even benevolent non sectarin leaders it's harder for them the hold power.
And it's going to get hotter before it gets cooler. The guys in power won't go down easily. The UN will get meaner. Europe will, too. Bush can stand up to that but I doubt Kerry would.
The Dems really picked the wrong candidate this time.
I don't agree with many things that Bush has done believe it or not. I think the UN has proven itself useless and corrupt. They'll stand by in places they're needed. Dafur, Syria and even Iraq and a myriad of other places. They pulled stakes when they were attacked. The very thing they're supposed to do they don't. It's a beaureucratic nightmare that has ceased to be usefull due to their own inaction. Turning the keys over to them would be as usefull as hips on a snake. Kerry will bring France and Germany on board though, oh wait.
His last-resort reason: Saddam Hussein might
havedeveloped weapons that he
might
havegiven to terrorists that might
attackthe United States.
That was one of the reason for going, that he might have these things, develop worse ones and his ties to terrorist made it possible to pass them on. As you remember from the U.N. resolutions it was Saddam's duty to show that he got rid of them, not ours to show that he had them. With all the gaps between what he admitted to having and showed that he got rid of, he did not pass that test.
It is a little stronger than just a might. According to the unfinished report
(link)
:
Saddam wanted to end sanctions while preserving the capability to reconstitute his weapons of mass destruction (WMD) when sanctions were lifted.
Iraq’s decisions in 1996 to accept the Oil-For-Food program (OFF) and later in 1998 to cease cooperation with UNSCOM and IAEA spurred a period of increased activity in delivery systems development.
By 2002, Iraq had provided the liquid-propellant Al Samud II—a program started in 2001—and the solidpropellant Al Fat’h to the military and was pursuing a series of new small UAV systems.
ISG uncovered Iraqi plans or designs for three long-range ballistic missiles with ranges from 400 to 1,000 km and for a 1,000-km-range cruise missile, although none of these systems progressed to production and only one reportedly passed the design phase. ISG assesses that these plans demonstrate Saddam’s continuing desire—up to the beginning of Operation Iraqi Freedom (OIF)—for a long-range delivery capability.
Given Iraq’s investments in technology and infrastructure improvements, an effective procurement network, skilled scientists, and designs already on the books for longer range missiles, ISG assesses that Saddam clearly intended to reconstitute long-range delivery systems and that the systems potentially were for WMD.
Saddam did express his intent to retain the intellectual capital developed during the Iraqi Nuclear Program. Senior Iraqis—several of them from the Regime’s inner circle—told ISG they assumed Saddam would restart a nuclear program once UN sanctions ended.
Saddam never abandoned his intentions to resume a CW effort when sanctions were lifted and conditions were judged favorable
Iraq constructed a number of new plants starting in the mid-1990s that enhanced its chemical infrastructure, although its overall industry had not fully recovered from the effects of sanctions, and had not regained pre-1991 technical sophistication or production capabilities prior to Operation Iraqi Freedom
Uday—head of the Fedayeen Saddam—attempted to obtain chemical weapons for use during OIF (Operation Iraqi Freedom), according to reporting
Pretty damning report wouldn't you admit? Would you prefer that we waited until sanctions were lifted and Saddam had followed through on his wishes? Do you realize how many of our soldiers and civilians would have died if we had done just that?
In answer to your question about if we should invade Iran and North Korea, now is not the time for that. We are working with a bilateral group of nations on talks with North Korea even though Kerry wishes that we go it alone on that one.
We are also trying to get the U.N. to do something with Iran. They need to pass sanctions, get inspections and such. We should give them time like we did in Iraq. You do know that Saddam farted around with the U.N. for 12 years don't you?
If these things fail or appear to be getting out of hand, then will be the time to use our full force to protect ourselves. It would be a lot easier and cost a lot less human lives if we do it before they have the capabilities to inflict massive damage.
These countries did not become a problem because of president Bush. They started all this under the watchfull eyes of then president Clinton.
We need to keep an eye on the the U.N. and hold them accountable as well. It was just reported that a
UN inspector 'took £60,000 ($106,939.74 USD) in Iraq bribes'.
link
 The oil for food scam cost the world a tremendous amount of problems and almost gave Saddam everything he wanted.
You should be thanking president Bush for cleaning up the mess instead of using partisan politics against him.
[Edited 4 times. Most recently by on Oct 7, 2004 at 09:42pm.]
Except that Iran may be only a matter of months away from having a nuke, and they already have the missiles to carry one. All the UN ever does is give them time to do whatever they want to do anyway.
Israel will do something if we don't. THAT kind of instability the Middle East does NOT need. They got away with it in Iraq in the '80s but they won't this time. It'll be all the Arab states attacking Israel again, and we'll get into it.
[Edited by on Oct 7, 2004 at 09:48pm.]
Except that Iran may be only a matter of months away from having a nuke, and they already have the missiles to carry one. All the UN ever does is give them time to do whatever they want to do anyway.
Israel will do something if we don't. THAT kind of instability the MIddle East does NOT need. They got away with it in Iraq in the '80s but they won't this time. It'll be all the Arab states attacking Israel again, and we'll get into it.
Agreed.
Like I said, if things appear to be getting out of hand we should then do something.
Muskwa 10/7/04 9:48pm
I don't think our recent sale of Smart Bombs to Israel was a coincidence.
[Edited by on Oct 7, 2004 at 09:58pm.]
I don't think our recent sale of Smart Bombs to Isreal was a coincidence.
Oh I'm sure it was ;)
Luv2Fly 10/7/04 9:56pm
<wink wink>
<nudge nudge>
;)
We were.....just making money for Haliburton...Yeah, that's the ticket.
Grandpa Dan Zachary 10/7/04 10:00pm
Damn... I almost forgot about that. ;)
Anyone think the Bush people are planning to take out Iran and North Korea in the second term?
I don't think they're planning on it, but it's always a possibility if they don't straighten up and fly right.
If, for no other reason, than they can?
Iraq is cake walk compared to Iran & N Korea. N Korea would be the worst. We'd have to deal with China.
WASHINGTON Â— Federal law enforcement authorities notified school districts in six states last month that a computer disc found in Iraq contained photos, floor plans and other information about their schools, two U.S. officials said Thursday.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,134820,00.html
Abdul Qadir: part of the problem not a part of the solution.
Israel will do something if we don't. THAT kind of instability the Middle East does NOT need. They got away with it in Iraq in the '80s but they won't this time.It'll be all the Arab states attacking Israel again, and we'll get into it.
Oh, I don't know about that.
It is sad, and too bad... But it won't
work...because they do not WANT us to win, not in that way. They want to set up a government under the teachings of Allah, or Islam, and that is their right. Will WEallow them to have that sort of Government? NO... Not with GDubbya in office.
Iraq will do what they want because we need an ally in the Iraqi government. And Bush won't even try to prevent it.
So it will fail...all the dead and wounded, all the damage done to our international standing and all the bullshit Gdubbya has said otherwise, still it will come out the SAME, a Theocracy. Not a "D
emocracy".
It will all fail if Kerry is elected. He is a spineless fellow.