First No WMD, and Now No Al Qaeda Contact...

[Stringer]

From the Senate Report released earlier....

USA Today Article

I agree with the repubs that this is election year posturing, but even the Admin is not fighting the reports conclusion.....

[Fishu]

http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=186717

[midnight Target]

Kinda puts a damper on Bush's "Fear and Smear" tour.

[lazs2]

mt... to me... we had to fight em somewhere... it was inevitable.   The sadman was a bad man.. he had worked on nukes in the past and would again.. he attacked his neighbors and would again..  the terrorists need to be concentrated in SOME area and foungt... they ducked out of afghanistan too easy.. they are dying quite well in iraq..

The soldiers there so far are ok with it and so am I.

The election to me is not about any war... it is about social ideas or... social ideas forced on me.  

It is about what kind of judges will be appointed and about what kind of bills are even brought up.

In that respect... Bush has been a success.   I don't like the guy but a democrat is unthinkable.

We have no choice at all at this point but to vote for whatever republicans are put out there.

lazs

[eagl]

We've succeded in creating a new power balance in the region.  All is back to normal, and we can leave now.  The whackos are busy fighting each other instead of us, as intended.  Victory is ours!  Now let's pack up and go home before they realize they've been tricked into shooting each other again.

[Eagler]

hindsight is 20/20

the evidence/intelligence against Iraq was not created after Sept 11 2001, it was being gathered, discussed and BELIEVED way back into the early 90's.
All Sadam had to do to avoid the fight was to stick to the deal he agreed to when Bush Sr 1st handed him his arse after Desert Storm. Of course the next admin was slightly distracted with fat interns & a bubbling economy so they just let everything stew for 8 years and were happy to hand the entire mess off to the next group, Bush Jr.

[Seagoon]

Hello MT,

Originally posted by midnight Target
Kinda puts a damper on Bush's "Fear and Smear" tour.

Way back in May, I was sent a link to a short story on Dan Simmon's blog. I knew Simmon's from way back as a sci-fi writer, the author of the Hugo award winning "Hyperion" series back when I was reading a lot of sci-fi and cyber-punk in the late 80s early 90s (Asimov, Dick, Heinlein, Herbert, Gibson, and Greg Bear being my favorites at the time).

Anyway, I was reminded of the story again yesterday and it seems like as good a reply as any to your comment:    

EDIT: On third thought there is just too much bad language in the story, along with an essentially hopeless worldview, for me to feel comfortable posting a link - especially one that kids might click on. Those of you adults who are overly interested in finding out what it was can google "Dan Simmons" and "Time Traveller" and then click on the top link.

- SEAGOON

[Angus]

Originally posted by lazs2
mt... to me... we had to fight em somewhere... it was inevitable.   The sadman was a bad man.. he had worked on nukes in the past and would again.. he attacked his neighbors and would again..  the terrorists need to be concentrated in SOME area and foungt... they ducked out of afghanistan too easy.. they are dying quite well in iraq..

The soldiers there so far are ok with it and so am I.

The election to me is not about any war... it is about social ideas or... social ideas forced on me.  

It is about what kind of judges will be appointed and about what kind of bills are even brought up.

In that respect... Bush has been a success.   I don't like the guy but a democrat is unthinkable.

We have no choice at all at this point but to vote for whatever republicans are put out there.

lazs

...

Those dying in Iraq are mostly civilians AFAIK. The terrorists had a tremendous entry, managed to snatch tremendous amounts of armaments and explosives in a routed country, and now they have a tremendous time proving their terror with executions and bombings.

And as far as it goes to elections, maybe it's better that the women don't vote? At least there are some islamic countries that fare very well with subduing women's rights, yes?

[Nilsen]

Originally posted by Eagler
hindsight is 20/20

Indeed, but dont forget that most outside the US and UK saw this before the invasion. So what is hindsight to the Bush admin and co is not to alot of others.

[lukster]

Originally posted by Seagoon
Hello MT,

 

Way back in May, I was sent a link to a short story on Dan Simmon's blog. I knew Simmon's from way back as a sci-fi writer, the author of the Hugo award winning "Hyperion" series back when I was reading a lot of sci-fi and cyber-punk in the late 80s early 90s (Asimov, Dick, Heinlein, Herbert, Gibson, and Greg Bear being my favorites at the time).

Anyway, I was reminded of the story again yesterday and it seems like as good a reply as any to your comment:    

EDIT: On third thought there is just too much bad language in the story, along with an essentially hopeless worldview, for me to feel comfortable posting a link - especially one that kids might click on. Those of you adults who are overly interested in finding out what it was can google "Dan Simmons" and "Time Traveller" and then click on the top link.

- SEAGOON

I don't know if MT will enjoy it but I did, thanks.

[lazs2]

nelson... what exactly did those outside the country see?   They seen the sadman attack his neighbor... they seen that he would gas his own people... they seen him defy the UN sanctions over and over.   they seen him continue to try to get WMD's.

I don't get it... you guys get all wet over the UN but then refuse to back em up?   Is it no so much how many sanctions they give a country but how you feel about it?

You are no better than us in that regard... you pick and choose what actions of the UN you will support.

angus...   not letting women vote and basing your country on a religion are really two different topics.

You can simply not have a religious controlled political system and not allow women to vote.   We did it for a long time here and it worked great.

lazs

[Gh0stFT]

First No WMD, and Now No Al Qaeda Contact...


what Mission ????? lol

[FUNKED1]

Mission: "Bankrupt America Financially, Morally, and Diplomatically"

[lukster]

Originally posted by FUNKED1
Mission: "Bankrupt America Financially, Morally, and Diplomatically"

pffffffftttt

We've been bankrupt in at least the moral category for some time. To do nothing while Sadaam continued to thumb his nose at us would have only weakened our diplomatic influence even further.

[Seagoon]

Hi Lukster,

Originally posted by lukster
I don't know if MT will enjoy it but I did, thanks.

For all of its unedifying verbage, I thought it had value if only for a few challenging insights like the following:

“After Nine-eleven, we’re fighting terrorism,” I began, “not . . .”

He waved me into silence.

You were a philosophy major or minor at that podunk little college you went to long ago,” said the Time Traveler. “Do you remember what Category Error is?”

It rang a bell. But I was too irritated at hearing my alma mater being called a “podunk little college” to be able to concentrate fully.

“I’ll tell you what it is,” said the Time Traveler. “In philosophy and formal logic, and it has its equivalents in science and business management, Category Error is the term for having stated or defined a problem so poorly that it becomes impossible to solve that problem, through dialectic or any other means.”

I waited. Finally I said firmly, “You can’t go to war with a religion. Or, I mean . . . sure, you could . . . the Crusades and all that . . . but it would be wrong.”

The Time Traveler sipped his Scotch and looked at me. He said, “Let me give you an analogy . . .”

...I hated and distrusted analogies. I said nothing.

“Let’s imagine,” said the Time Traveler, “that on December eighth, Nineteen forty-one, President Franklin Delano Roosevelt spoke before a joint session of Congress and asked them to declare war on aviation.”

“That’s absurd,” I said.

“Is it?” asked the Time Traveler. “The American battleships, cruisers, harbor installations, Army barracks, and airfields at Pearl Harbor and elsewhere in Hawaii were all struck by Japanese aircraft. Imagine if the next day Roosevelt had declared war on aviation . . . threatening to wipe it out wherever we found it. Committing all the resources of the United States of America to defeating aviation, so help us God.”

“That’s just stupid,” I said. If I’d ever been afraid of this Time Traveler, I wasn’t now. He was obviously a mental defective.“The planes, the Japanese planes,” I said, “were just a method of attack . . . a means . . . it wasn’t aviation that attacked us at Pearl Harbor, but the Empire of Japan. We declared war on Japan and a few days later its ally, Germany, lived up to its treaty with the Japanese and declared war on us. If we’d declared war on aviation, on whoopeeed airplanes rather than the empire and ideology that launched them, we’d never have . . .”

I stopped. What had he called it? Category Error. Making the problem unsolvable through your inability – or fear – of defining it correctly.

- SEAGOON