Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 43

Thread: David Kay resigns as WMD search chief

  1. #21
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    If O'Reilly made a dumbass promise like that, he deserves whatever scrutiny he gets.

    You libs tried to back supporters of this war into a corner with this WMD only strawman. Anyone that fell into your trap, shame on them!

    The President, his administration, myself and other's that support this war never said WMDs were the only reason to go -- and I dare any one of you to search and find such a statement. You won't and you can't.

    I guess the anthrax attacks were BS too, because we have no evidence anyone did it. And I guess we should have left Saddam alone because whatever he did was his own personal business and he needed to get back to work for the Iraqi people.

    To summarize, it didn't matter what was or wasn't found, you libacrites would have found a way to spin regardless.

  2. #22
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Middletown Md
    Posts
    673
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 01:54 PM
    [b] [quote][b]I have a question if Bush loses and Kerry for arguments sake wins as the new pres would you offer an apology to the world for invading Iraq based on bogus info or would you ignore it and stay the course? If so would it help or hurt the U.S.' image to do either? [/b][/quote]

    I would hope he would publically apologize and I think we could possibly gain back some International respect. [/b][/quote]
    Publicly apologize.....Gain back some international respect.....Eau contrare.....

    What the hell do WE have to apologize for anyway ?.....

    WE weren't the ones who were imprisoning, torturing, raping, and stealing from the Iraqi people.....that was Saddam.

    WE weren't the ones who committed genocide against the Kurds.....that was Saddam.....

    WE weren't the ones who had a policy of " cleansing " the shiites in the early 90's.....that was Saddam.....

    WE weren't the ones who stifled any poltiical discussion in Iraq by killing anyone who dissented from " his " program.....that was Saddam.....

    WE weren't the ones who had daily executions carried out usually on nothing more than a whim.....that was Saddam.....

    WE weren't the ones who brainwashed children beginning at the age of 5 where they were forced to undergo military training and watch animal cruelty.....that was Saddam.....

    WE weren't the ones who put peoples children in prison because their parents wouldn't tote the party line.....that was Saddam.....

    WE weren't the ones who attacked our neighbor{s} and caused hundreds of thousands of people to be killed in unnecessary wars.....that was Saddam.....

    The list goes on and on and on.....

    WE were the ones who believed he had WMD's and we were not alone.....even the liberals beloved France admitted as much to the U.N, what happened to them.....I have no idea.....but it is much more likely that he had them and either dismantled them with the intention of rebuilding the program once the inspectors were no longer a threat...or...he moved them to a friendly neighbor like Syria to avoid detection than it is to believe he never actually possessed what WE and THE REST OF THE CIVILIZED WORLD could document that he recieved.

    The man was not an idiot.....do you think maybe.....just maybe.....he could've foresaw a scenario where it would be in his best interests to hide the WMD's until it was safe to bring them back. seems reasonable to me.

    And so now that the WMD's have avoided detection we're supposed to apologize and this will give us some international respect.....that's the most ridiculous thing I believe I've ever heard in my life.....

  3. #23
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]WE weren't the ones who were imprisoning, torturing, raping, and stealing from the Iraqi people.....that was Saddam.
    [/b][/quote]

    Are you trying to say that Iraq is the only bad country in the world? There are many horrible regimes in the world committing atrocities, shouldn't we spend billions to invade them as well? Or only if they have rich supplies of oil?

  4. #24
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 01:54 PM
    [b] [quote][b]I have a question if Bush loses and Kerry for arguments sake wins as the new pres would you offer an apology to the world for invading Iraq based on bogus info or would you ignore it and stay the course? If so would it help or hurt the U.S.' image to do either? [/b][/quote]

    I would hope he would publically apologize and I think we could possibly gain back some International respect. [/b][/quote]
    Of course you would cause you are a capitulator. You'd rather stand by, do nothing and complain then take part in the hard tasks.

    Personally, like most Americans, I don't give a fuq what the french or germans think or say.

    My wife's family is from Italy and recently her uncle went back and got into a heated discussion with some of the locals; "Bush is bad, America's a bully."

    After pointing out the obvious; America saved Italy from one if his own he basically told them, "when terrorists fly planes into your buildings and kill 3000 of your innocents who were doing nothing but going to work then what you say will matter....." After that his combatants became quiet.

  5. #25
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]After pointing out the obvious; America saved Italy from one if his own he basically told them, "when terrorists fly planes into your buildings and kill 3000 of your innocents who were doing nothing but going to work then what you say will matter....." After that his combatants became quiet. [/b][/quote]

    So basically you are pointing out that Italy doesn't have this problem because they don't piss off the rest of the world like we do.

  6. #26
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Middletown Md
    Posts
    673
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 03:05 PM
    [b] [quote][b]WE weren't the ones who were imprisoning, torturing, raping, and stealing from the Iraqi people.....that was Saddam.
    [/b][/quote]

    Are you trying to say that Iraq is the only bad country in the world? There are many horrible regimes in the world committing atrocities, shouldn't we spend billions to invade them as well? Or only if they have rich supplies of oil? [/b][/quote]
    No.....there are many horrible dictators in the world who commit atrocities on a par with what Saddam did.

    I personally would like to see all the brutal dictatorial regimes come to an end but it is impossible for us to do it and frankly.....it really isn't our job, all we can do is hope these regimes collapse under their own weight and mismanagement.

    But.....as for Iraq.....it's a little different than say Indonesia or the Congo or most of the other brutal dictatorships out there and part of the reason why is in fact oil.....I believe the main reason H.W Bush had us go over there to free the Kuwaitiis and give them back their country was because the direct threat to us that a madman like Hussein would've had holding an economical gun to our heads and jerking around our economy at his whim was and should've been completely unacceptable and we were correct and just in our actions.

    But there were other non oil related reasons as well.....I think the fact that Hussein had previously used WMD against his neighbor { Iran } and his own people { Kurds } puts him in a special place as far as dictators are concerned.

    And the fact that all this is going on in the Middle East is pretty damned important as well.....If Hussein had been left to his own devices who knows how much havoc he would've wreaked.....he was already paying Palestinian families who lost sons and daughters in suicide attacks against Israel.....he clearly needed to go if we're ever gonna have any stability in that region.

    So to answer your question...Yes there are other equally horrible regimes out there...but...Iraq IMHO deserved to be at the top of the list and for alot of reasons other than oil.

  7. #27
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]I personally would like to see all the brutal dictatorial regimes come to an end but it is impossible for us to do it and frankly.....it really isn't our job, all we can do is hope these regimes collapse under their own weight and mismanagement.
    [/b][/quote]

    The sad thing is a lot of these regimes were instilled there by us.

  8. #28
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Middletown Md
    Posts
    673
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 04:03 PM
    [b] [quote][b]I personally would like to see all the brutal dictatorial regimes come to an end but it is impossible for us to do it and frankly.....it really isn't our job, all we can do is hope these regimes collapse under their own weight and mismanagement.
    [/b][/quote]

    The sad thing is a lot of these regimes were instilled there by us. [/b][/quote]
    Enlighten me........whom ?.....

  9. #29
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    Off the top of my head: Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Taliban, Nicaragua, Osama Bin Laden, and who knows how many others. Maybe the Homeland Security Department should cross-reference the graduates of the School of the Americas.

  10. #30
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Middletown Md
    Posts
    673
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 04:43 PM
    [b] Off the top of my head: Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Taliban, Nicaragua, Osama Bin Laden, and who knows how many others. Maybe the Homeland Security Department should cross-reference the graduates of the School of the Americas. [/b][/quote]
    WE installed those regimes.....please elaborate.....

  11. #31
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]WE installed those regimes.....please elaborate..... [/b][/quote]

    Cuba: We supported Castro when he took power.

    Iraq: We supported Sadaam by providing weapons which he later used against us in the first Gulf War.

    Iran: The CIA helped overthrow the Shah.

    Nicaragua: Manuel Noriega was a U.S. CIA agent.

    Osama Bin Laden: We trained Bin Laden in Afghanistans war with Russia.

  12. #32
    I disagree with Section's list, but to reject it out of hand or react to it with some cries of "anti-American" is ignorant and shows an inability to see history from both sides (note I did not use the word "objective" since I'm wagering none of us were there to see these things in action, and if we were we'd be even MORE subjective in our opinions).

    It is an indisputable historical fact that the CIA and past Presidential Administrations openly helped overthrow the governments of Chile (1973, Allende), Iran (1950's, Mossadegh), and Nicaragua (1980s, Sandinista). How many outed CIA documents, admissions from officials who were involved, and hindsight do you need to just admit this?

    [url=http://intellit.muskingum.edu/cia_folder/cia80s_folder/cia80snic.html]http://intellit.muskingum.edu/cia_folder/c.../cia80snic.html[/url]
    [url=http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publications/nicaragua/nicaragua.html]http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/nsa/publicati.../nicaragua.html[/url]

    [url=http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/mideast/041600iran-cia-index.html]http://www.nytimes.com/library/world/midea...-cia-index.html[/url]
    [url=http://globalsecurity.com/global_security/book_review/book_review.htm]http://globalsecurity.com/global_security/...book_review.htm[/url]

    [url=http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/12/1063341769341.html]http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2003/09/12/...3341769341.html[/url]
    [url=http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB8/nsaebb8.htm]http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB...BB8/nsaebb8.htm[/url]

    It wasn't "WE" in the sense of the American people, but it was our government acting in what it believed were its best interests. All of these things led to "Saddamesque" dictatorships that tortured their own people and commited all of the atrocities Spirit of Weeb's and Come Back to NY's hearts suddenly bleed over when it's a nation on Bush's agenda.

    We can sit here all day and argue about how these actions were somehow necessary to combat Russian interests at the time, or stop a vital flow of natural resources (sound familiar) into the country, but trying to ignore it or dismissing everyone who reads into this history as "unpatriotic" is counterproductive and reactionary at best, pathetic and brainwashed at worst. And yes, people who read Noam Chomsky and spew anti-establishment rhetoric without cross-referencing the sources are also biased by a clear agenda -- but they are NOT and have never been in power sending Americans to die overseas (insert ridiculous Kosovo argument here, like Clinton was some sort of far leftist pacifist).

    I don't even need to touch the Taliban, Viet Nam, Cambodia, or Saddam-back-when-he-was-our-friend, because I don't believe those regimes were "installed" by the American government even if they often rose out of power vacuums created by backing military actions like Osama's "freedom fighters", the South Vietnamese, etc. Those are much more complex historical issues where I don't think the US gov't at the time was as purely wrong as it was in the case of Iran, Chile, and Nicaragua.

    Why is Cuba even on that list? We had zilch to do with Castro, other than Kennedy's spat with him leading to my inability to legally get the world's best cigars and smoke them on my back porch because of the lobbying of a bunch of idiotic Cuban exiles in Miami who smuggle and smoke them regularly.

  13. #33
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 05:04 PM
    [b] [quote][b]WE installed those regimes.....please elaborate..... [/b][/quote]

    Cuba: We supported Castro when he took power.

    Iraq: We supported Sadaam by providing weapons which he later used against us in the first Gulf War.

    Iran: The CIA helped overthrow the Shah.

    Nicaragua: Manuel Noriega was a U.S. CIA agent.

    Osama Bin Laden: We trained Bin Laden in Afghanistans war with Russia. [/b][/quote]
    You forgot to tell us how America proped up Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Hitler, Hirhito, Musolini, Napolean...did I forget any?

    And you libs express outrage about being called anti-American because...

  14. #34
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]You forgot to tell us how America proped up Lenin, Stalin, Pol Pot, Mao Tse Tung, Hitler, Hirhito, Musolini, Napolean...did I forget any?

    And you libs express outrage about being called anti-American because...[/b][/quote]

    If disagreeing with our long interventionist history that is continuing to this day is anti-American then yes I am anti-American. This isn't the Cold War, being called anti-American has no meaining especially now the way you conservatives fling it around.

    BTW that was a well thought-out comeback you really did your research to dispute my statements.

  15. #35
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Middletown Md
    Posts
    673
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 05:04 PM
    [b][quote][b]WE installed those regimes.....please elaborate..... [/b][/quote]

    Cuba: We supported Castro when he took power.

    Iraq: We supported Sadaam by providing weapons which he later used against us in the first Gulf War.

    Iran: The CIA helped overthrow the Shah.

    Nicaragua: Manuel Noriega was a U.S. CIA agent.

    Osama Bin Laden: We trained Bin Laden in Afghanistans war with Russia.[/b][/quote]
    Interesting.....

    We suppotred Castro when he took power ?.....

    As I recall reading { cause I wasn't born yet to see for myself } we supported the Batista regime who allowed U.S businesses to prosper at what some precieved to be the detriment of the Cuban people.

    Castro did not allow American businessmen to do business in Cuba and the U.S government declared Castro to be dangerous and took steps against his country including an international embargo.

    From everything I've ever heard or read we much preferred the Batista regime over Castro and never supported Castro.....while it would've been in everyones best interests to establish a dialogue after we accepted Castro as the leader I've never seen or heard where we " supported Castro ".

    We supported Saddam ?.....

    Yes.....we armed Saddam in his war with Iran...but...at that time Iran was a bigger threat to both us and instability in the region and we backed the regime who at the time was our best option, they hadn't taken american hostages and threatened americans throughout the world like Iran had.

    Things change.....once Saddam revealed himself to be the maniacal dictator he was with asperations to spread his cancer throughout the middle east we rightfully withdrew our support, I really don't know what else we could've done, to me hindsight is always 20 / 20 but I don't think we had a good choice in the matter, we most certainly weren't gonna allow Iran and radical Islam to spread to neighboring countries so we took Saddam's side, it may have turned out to look bad but I still fail to see exactly where it was so insidious.

    The C.I.A helped overthrow the Shah ?.....

    Well.....the C.I.A has been accused of alot and whenever there is a conspiracy theory from someone who is against the U.S it usually begins with the words " the C.I.A plotted " etc.....

    I find it a little far-fetched to believe.....Why would we want to remove the Shah who we openly supported, he was our best option over there and we shared some of the same ideas.

    He built cities, allowed women to vote and hold jobs, and was creating a less secular society, he had warts but he was more like us than anybody else.

    And the C.I.A somehow decided he needed to go and be replaced by a muslim radical who openly called the U.S " the great Satan ".....seems rather inplausable to me.

    Noriega was a C.I.A agent ?.....

    We didn't support Noriega taking over Panama.....we supported Nicolas Barletta who was the first elected president since the 1968 coup but Noriega had him ousted and assumed the presidency.

    Was Noriega on our payroll ?.....I believe he was, he apparantly was on our patroll long before he assumed control of the country and stayed on the payroll for a little time while in power.

    Is that so terrible ?.....I don't think so.....at that time we were in the middle of the cold war and we had to have people on our payroll looking out for our interests in order to keep up with the Soviets.

    There was alot of espionage going on during those times and the fact that we had people on the payroll who had access to foreign governments isn't exactly a secret.....nor should it be used against us.

    As for training and supporting Osama.....

    The Soviets were a bigger threat to us at the time and to support Soviet expansion at that time obviously wasn't the way to go.

    What should we have done at the time anyway ?.....look the other way and allow the soviets to take yet another country, maybe we should've done nothing at all and allowed for communist expansion.....that would've been brilliant strategy.....at that time we needed the Afghans to stand up and defend themselves and we did the right thing.

    Again.....Hindsight is 20 / 20 but to blame us because we helped the Afghani's against the Soviets seems a little misguided, we didn't create Osama.....we supported people who we had mutual interests with, it happens all the time.

  16. #36
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [quote][b]We suppotred Castro when he took power ?.....

    As I recall reading { cause I wasn't born yet to see for myself } we supported the Batista regime who allowed U.S businesses to prosper at what some precieved to be the detriment of the Cuban people.

    Castro did not allow American businessmen to do business in Cuba and the U.S government declared Castro to be dangerous and took steps against his country including an international embargo.

    From everything I've ever heard or read we much preferred the Batista regime over Castro and never supported Castro.....while it would've been in everyones best interests to establish a dialogue after we accepted Castro as the leader I've never seen or heard where we " supported Castro ".
    [/b][/quote]

    Your right I'm sorry, I was mistaken. But that still supports my argument, the reason Castro was able to take power was because Batista was a tyrant and we fully supported him.

    Junta said it better than I, I havn't studied all the facts and frankly no-one has all the facts since a lot of the meddling we've done/do is classified and we may never know. There is strong evidence, however, that we played a role in supporting regimes that are just as bad a Sadaam yet we are not taking over any of them. For all this Democracy we preach how many countries have we helped attain that goal?

  17. #37
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Middletown Md
    Posts
    673
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 06:43 PM
    [b] But that still supports my argument, the reason Castro was able to take power was because Batista was a tyrant and we fully supported him.

    [/b][/quote]
    All I can say is we've been heavily involved globally since the early 1900's and while we're far from perfect and have made plenty of mistakes regarding foreign governments the world as a whole is a much better place because of our continued involvement.

    Have we supported the wrong people at times.....certainly.....with the amount of involvement and influence we wield there's no way we couldn't make mistakes over the years.

    But I think that if you balanced out the mistakes we've made along the way against our many successes almost anyone who can be objective would have to admit we've been a positive global force for a long time and the world will be better off if we continue to assist other countries as we've been.

  18. #38
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Boston
    Posts
    11,692
    Every decision involves trade-offs and "opportunity cost" to use an economic term. Supporting the mujahadeen (sp?) against the Soviet Union in the 80's, for instance, turned out to have produced an outcome that led OBL to be what he is today (oversimplification, but you get the thrust).

    However, the trade-off we made at the time was not allowing the Soviet Union to get a foothold into that region (and obviously not allowing them to spread farther into the ME and possibly corner the world's oil market, take over Israel, etc)

    We had to and always have to weigh our strategic goals against every possible outcome (not aiding the Afganis in the 80's, not driving Iraq out of Kuwait in 91, etc) EVERY decision involves the value of the forgone option.

    Perhaps if we didn't wage war against Iraq in 91, we don't need to station troops in Saudi Arabia and OBL doens't get pissed and 9-11 doesn't happen. However, the cost of that option would be Saddam's possible invasion of Saudi Arabia and cornering of the world oil market. He could have also, at that point, teamed with AQ or Hizbollah in any number of ways and would have been immeasurably more powerful and thus that much more difficult to invade at that point than he would have been in 1991.

    So - to examine the flaws of our previous decisions WITHOUT also examining the opportunity cost involved, IMO is grossly misleading, and it occurs often when people glibly state things like "We CREATED" most dictators, as if we did so in a vaccuum. The implication that an option of perpetual peace and sunshine existed and the USA just chose evil is grossly inaccurate and immature. Intellectually lazy people with agendas do it. Again, this is all an oversimplification, but you get it. Perhaps propping up a shah is preferrable to leaving a power vaccuum that allows the Soviets to control. Perhaps THEY tried to prop up their own shah. We are dealing, often, with two undesirable outcomes in these areas, and need to weight opportunity cost of both heavily.

    The problem with education and information these days is that people have a dangerously superficial exposure to a LARGE amount of subjects...they consider themelves to be informed when they are in fact, ignorant. (yours truly included)

    In light of all this - we have definitely made strategic errors in the past and are far from perfect (I would contend that Jet Set's example of Allende is an example of an error, as is a lot of our Central American history, alas). That is surely no newsflash. It pays, however, to understand all this, lest we be overly critical or overly understanding about USA foreign policy endeavors.

  19. #39
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 04:43 PM
    [b] Off the top of my head: Cuba, Iraq, Iran, Taliban, Nicaragua, Osama Bin Laden, and who knows how many others. Maybe the Homeland Security Department should cross-reference the graduates of the School of the Americas. [/b][/quote]
    Maybe you should start to think with your head and not your ass....are you serious with that list or is this more moore BS?

    As someone so eloquently put it when you first posted your hatred of America on this board stating to don't support our troops; if I walked past Sec109 and saw him in flames I wouldn't as much as piss on him to douse the fire!!

  20. #40
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    NJ
    Posts
    2,393
    [quote][i]Originally posted by Section109Row15[/i]@Jan 26 2004, 03:43 PM
    [b] So basically you are pointing out that Italy doesn't have this problem because they don't piss off the rest of the world like we do. [/b][/quote]
    Why, oh why do you live in such a horrible country then?

    Do us a favor, move to France and take a few of your left wing friends with you.

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