Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 33

Thread: How Many Lives Were Lost? How Much Tax Money Was Spent?

  1. #1

    How Many Lives Were Lost? How Much Tax Money Was Spent?

    [B][SIZE="4"]Colin Powell: U.S. was set for war with Iraq before his U.N. speech[/SIZE][/B]

    The George W. Bush Administration was set on going to war with Iraq even before Colin Powell made his infamous 2003 weapons of mass destruction pitch to the United Nations, writes the former secretary of state in his new book, "It Worked For Me: In Life and Leadership."

    It might be Powell's biggest revelation in the book, which details the experiences and lessons learned during his career as a soldier, a four-star general and secretary of state.

    Powell writes in one chapter in which he discussed his address to the U.N. that war "was approaching," reports the Huffington Post, which obtained an advanced copy of the book slated for a May 22 release.

    "By then, the President did not think war could be avoided," Powell writes. "He had crossed the line in his own mind, even though the NSC [National Security Council] had never met--and never would meet--to discuss the decision."

    Powell refers to the address to the U.N. as a "blot." It was during that address that he appealed to the international body to support the United States because the country--albeit, erroneously--believed Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, notes a Bloomberg report on the book.

    The speech and the facts surrounding the speech serve as a lesson to business leaders on the importance of staying skeptical and following their intuition, Powell writes.

    "Yes, a blot, a failure will always be attached to me and my UN presentation," the former U.S. secretary of state writes. ... "I am mad mostly at myself for not having smelled the problem. My instincts failed me."

    Powell points a finger at Dick Cheney and Scooter Libby, the former vice president's chief of staff, as the ones responsible for providing the inaccurate information about Iraq's possession of weapons of mass destruction, the Huffington Post reports.

    [B]In the book, Powell notes the weapons of mass destruction case "was a disaster."

    "I learned later that Scooter Libby, Vice President Cheney's chief of staff, had authored the unusable presentation, not the NSC staff. And several years after that, I learned from Dr. [Condoleezza] Rice that the idea of using Libby had come from the Vice President, who had persuaded the President to have Libby, a lawyer, write the 'case' as a lawyer's brief and not as an intelligence assessment."[/B] :eek:

    Powell, though, takes credit for rejecting continued appeals from Cheney to add "assertions that had been rejected months earlier to links between Iraq and 9/11 and other terrorist acts," according to the Huffington Post report.

    [url]http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/colin-powell-u-set-war-iraq-u-n-143557873.html[/url]

  2. #2
    You know, I heard it reported the other day that over 75% of the U.S. deaths in Afghanistan have now occured under Obama.

    Tell me, why did the vast majority of Anti-War protests and the daily American Death Counts and Total Death Counts in the media all stop when Obama took over?

  3. #3
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,415
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4464940]You know, I heard it reported the other day that over 75% of the U.S. deaths in Afghanistan have now occured under Obama.

    Tell me, why did the vast majority of Anti-War protests and the daily American Death Counts and Total Death Counts in the media all stop when Obama took over?[/QUOTE]

    Warfish, you are clearly racist. And you probably hate gays. And poor people.

  4. #4
    [QUOTE=shakin318;4464954]Warfish, you are clearly racist. And you probably hate gays. And poor people.[/QUOTE]

    As you can see from the NC Thread, for one often labeled a right-winger by our Liberal and Pregressive Freinds, I am apparently rather Pro-Gay.

    I do hate Poor people tho. ;)

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,332
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4464993]As you can see from the NC Thread, for one often labeled a right-winger by our Liberal and Pregressive Freinds, I am apparently rather Pro-Gay.

    I do hate Poor people tho. ;)[/QUOTE]

    Where do you fall on Gay Poor people?

  6. #6
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,415
    [QUOTE=Trades;4465012]Where do you fall on Gay Poor people?[/QUOTE]

    Yeah right, as if. Being gay is quite an expensive lifestyle. Well, at least it is if you're doing it right.

  7. #7
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4464940]You know, I heard it reported the other day that over 75% of the U.S. deaths in Afghanistan have now occured under Obama.

    Tell me, why did the vast majority of Anti-War protests and the daily American Death Counts and Total Death Counts in the media all stop when Obama took over?[/QUOTE]

    It's a GIANT CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!!!!!

  8. #8
    Jets Insider VIP
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    New Jersey
    Posts
    6,332
    [QUOTE=cr726;4465051]It's a GIANT CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE]

    Conspiracy no, clear case of bias, yes.

  9. #9
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    State Location Here
    Posts
    8,415
    [QUOTE=Trades;4465059]Conspiracy no, clear case of bias, yes.[/QUOTE]

    Eh, not really bias. More like massive hypocrisy.

  10. #10
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    7,252
    [QUOTE=shakin318;4464954]Warfish, you are clearly racist. And you probably hate gays. And poor people.[/QUOTE]

    Poor gay black people are the worst!

  11. #11
    I'm not going to defend the Iraq war here but.. a big reason given by the Bush administration and for going to war was the theory that a democracy in the heart of the Middle East would inspire other surrounding countries to follow suit. Interestingly we have now had democratic revolutions in Egypt, Syria, Lybia and Tunesia. Coincidence?

  12. #12
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    7,252
    [QUOTE=chiefst2000;4465084]I'm not going to defend the Iraq war here but.. a big reason given by the Bush administration and for going to war was the theory that a democracy in the heart of the Middle East would inspire other surrounding countries to follow suit. Interestingly we have now had democratic revolutions in Egypt, Syria, Lybia and Tunesia. Coincidence?[/QUOTE]


    That only became the theory after the WMD hoax was revealed, it was too late, and some kind of CYA spin had to be rolled out.

    Cheney was one evil SOB, Bush was a simpleton, easy to lead, desperate for some swag, and Rove was slick enough to keep everyone distracted and chasing their own tails until the meter ran out. Leading directly, as Warfish has said, to the perfect storm for the Obama abomination.

    Sounds like the back-story for a bad post-apoctalyoptic movie. :(

  13. #13
    [COLOR="Red"]How Many Lives Were Lost[/COLOR]? How Much Tax Money Was Spent?
    Nowhere near the 50,000 lost thanks to the two scumbags Kennedy and Johnson.

  14. #14
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,622
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4464940]You know, I heard it reported the other day that over 75% of the U.S. deaths in Afghanistan have now occured under Obama.

    Tell me, why did the vast majority of Anti-War protests and the daily American Death Counts and Total Death Counts in the media all stop when Obama took over?[/QUOTE]

    You'd never even know we were still at war in Afghanistan based on the media's coverage of it.

  15. #15
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Mianus CT
    Posts
    7,993
    [QUOTE=cr726;4465051]It's a GIANT CONSPIRACY!!!!!!!!!!![/QUOTE]

    wouldn't doubt it

  16. #16
    [QUOTE=acepepe;4465404][COLOR="Red"]How Many Lives Were Lost[/COLOR]? How Much Tax Money Was Spent?
    Nowhere near the 50,000 lost thanks to the two scumbags Kennedy and Johnson.[/QUOTE]

    I guess the thousands of deaths under Bush was okay then, got it :zzz: By the way, no reference to wasted tax money? Guess its okay when a (R) does it. :zzz: Last, your reference about JFK and the war is misleading as usual.....

    [I]Before leaving for Dallas, Kennedy told Michael Forrestal that "after the first of the year ... [he wanted] an in depth study of every possible option, including how to get out of there ... to review this whole thing from the bottom to the top". When asked what he thought the president meant, Forrestal said, "it was devil's advocate stuff."[114]

    Historians disagree on whether Vietnam would have escalated had Kennedy survived and been re-elected in 1964.[115] Fueling the debate are statements made by Secretary of Defense McNamara in the film "The Fog of War" that Kennedy was strongly considering pulling out of Vietnam after the 1964 election.[116] The film also contains a tape recording of Lyndon Johnson stating that Kennedy was planning to withdraw, a position that Johnson disagreed with.[117] Kennedy had signed National Security Action Memorandum (NSAM) 263, dated October 11, which ordered the withdrawal of 1,000 military personnel by the end of the year.[118][119] Such an action would have been a policy reversal, but Kennedy was moving in a less hawkish direction since his acclaimed speech about world peace at American University on June 10, 1963.[120]

    When Robert Kennedy was asked in 1964 what his brother would have done if the South Vietnamese had been on the brink of defeat, he replied, "We'd face that when we came to it."[121] At the time of Kennedy's death, no final policy decision had been made as to Vietnam.[122] U.S. involvement in the region escalated until Lyndon Johnson, his successor, directly deployed regular U.S. military forces for fighting the Vietnam War.[123][124] After Kennedy's assassination, President Johnson passed NSAM 273 on November 26, 1963. It reversed Kennedy's decision to withdraw 1,000 troops, and reaffirmed the policy of assistance to the South Vietnamese.[125][126][/I]

    [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Kennedy#Southeast_Asia[/url]

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=Warfish;4464940]You know, I heard it reported the other day that over 75% of the U.S. deaths in Afghanistan have now occured under Obama.

    Tell me, why did the vast majority of Anti-War protests and the daily American Death Counts and Total Death Counts in the media all stop when Obama took over?[/QUOTE]

    No thoughts on the OP?

  18. #18
    [QUOTE=shakin318;4465072]Eh, not really bias. More like massive hypocrisy.[/QUOTE]

    There is hypocrisy all around. One only needs to look at the direction of this thread. Cheney was an abomination and yet we turn the dial ever so slightly to focus on Obama and deftly change the subject.

    :rolleyes:

  19. #19
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,622
    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;4465459]There is hypocrisy all around. One only needs to look at the direction of this thread. Cheney was an abomination and yet we turn the dial ever so slightly to focus on Obama and deftly change the subject.

    :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    Turn the dial to... THE CURRENT PRESIDENT WHO HAS CONTINUED TO SEND TROOPS INTO HARM'S WAY. What an irrelevant tangent. :roll eyes:

    To the point of the OP, I'm not really surprised; in fact this shouldn't surprise anyone.

  20. #20
    [QUOTE=FF2;4465455]No thoughts on the OP?[/QUOTE]

    Not many new ones, no.

    This claim is rather old hat, the "Bush Was Determined To Go To War and Avenge His Father!" claim.

    The only thought that springs to mind that is new is "....isn't it a little far into the Obama Presidency to be looking at what the last guy did, and not what the current has has been doing, given he's runing for re-election?"

    I was against Iraq at the start, and my only support for it was once we were engaged and was specificly of the "we broke it, now we must fix it" variety, I should remind you. My friends on the right know I'm more an Isolationist than a NeoCon and a War Destroyer, not a War For Nation Builder, in my foreign policy ideas, so clearly I'm no fan of the Bush era, a man I continue to call the worst President in history.

    [QUOTE=intelligentjetsfan;4465459]There is hypocrisy all around. One only needs to look at the direction of this thread. Cheney was an abomination and yet we turn the dial ever so slightly to focus on Obama and deftly change the subject.

    :rolleyes:[/QUOTE]

    Probably because Cheney hasn't be in power in over three years.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us