Government and power to civilians

[Kraj]

Seemed like he was a threat to Kuwait, and even Iran.

Based on what, exactly?

What would make you say he wouldn't again be a threat if left to his own devices after a time?

Nothing. I've also never suggested he be left to his own devices.

OK, this one is contriversial, but you can't ignore some of these just because it serves your view on "I hate Bush".

The entire topic is controversial. I do ignore absurdly biased crap like that first link you posted, but I don't ignore information that may contradict my viewpoint. Case in point:

Normally, when I find information that supports someone else's position I keep it to myself. Why? Because I'm not in the habit of doing other people's work for them. But in this case I'm feeling charitable, as well as a sense of responsibility to Selena. That first website lists all sorts of sources (which is nice of them, since you can then see for yourself how they chop-shopped real journalism into their tabloid-esque crapfest), one of which I followed to the Wall Street Journal. Hooray! A real source. Unfortunately, it was an OpEd piece, which is not valid as a source. The article did, however, cite another source which actually is an interesting read. Here you go. The article still is rather suspect, but at least it's believable. The first page is crap, but the second page actually appears to discuss some honest-to-God information about links between Saddam and Al Queda.

That actually makes me happy, for a couple reasons. The notion that Saddam had no ties whatsoever is almost absurd, so I'm glad to be relieved of arguing the truth of it. Also, the thought that perhaps the Iraq war did actually hurt Al Queda in some way is rather encouraging. Ultimately, I'd love to be completely proven wrong. It would mean that all the time, money, and human lives spent in Iraq wouldn't have been a waste.

However... even if I completely change my viewpoint on Iraq's link to terrorism based on the new evidence, there are still two problems with using that as a justifaction of the Iraq war. 1.) Even if Saddam did have terrorist ties and did support Al Queda, that doesn't mean he was the best target. The same reasources could very well have been spent in a more effective operation. 2.) These links between Saddam and terrorism are based entirely on documents discovered after the Iraq invasion. Bush couldn't have possibly had such evidence before, so his claim was still based on nothing. He made it up (even if he was ultimately correct).

 

[Rich]

.
That's $48,000,000 for each dead person, and the majority of them were the wrong ones.

Who exactly would be the right ones?

 

[jsanders]

Well we have not had any ships blowed up (aka Cole) or barracks in non war areas blowed up, that kind of thing since the invasions. And I hear a lot of B. S. over Iraq, but what about Afganistan (sp)? Shoot, any more I am thinking, they do something to us, lets take another country! What I can't figure out is why England didn't do that after the London bombings. Would have a been a prime time to stand up and say, PISS OFF YOU BUGGERS!

I’ve said this before, war is not the answer.
Oh don’t get me wrong, a lot of people need to die, but war is too costly.

The only long term solution to terrorism is goon squads, and bounties.

For a tenth of the cost, of that family feud between Bush and Hussein, I could've had terrorist heads stuck on the top on pikes from here to Baghdad.

Please; defending a war that cost $1,200,000,000,000.

Where’s your sense of value?

That's $48,000,000 for each dead person, and the majority of them were the wrong ones.

 

[Kraj]

War according to GAAP. Creepy.

 

[jsanders]

War according to GAAP. Creepy.

We should have an auction...
"I can kill those terrorist for 1.5 million each."
"No wait I can do it for 1.4"

Assassination by the lowest bidder.

Ain’t democracy great?

 

[jsanders]

Seemed like he was a threat to Kuwait, and even Iran. What would make you say he wouldn't again be a threat if left to his own devices after a time?

So why not assasinate him and his leadership?
Why put our children in dept for life to support this feud?

 

[jsanders]

We have satellites that can burn holes in concrete and steel from 150 miles out in space. And with a fraction of $1,200,000,000,000 we could have built a whole lot more of them and propelled American technology 20 more years ahead of the rest of the world.

 

[ColinEssex]

I thought the USA has been looking for Bin Liner since 9/11 old Donny Rumsey said it'll take 6 weeks to find him - that was just after 9/11

A war in Afghanistan will only provide yet another base for insurgents to attack the US troops and kill civilians as it has done in Iraq. It gives any terrorist group an ideal opportunity to have a go at the US and kill US people without having the problem of going to the USA

If Iraq is an example of how the US smoothly changes regimes in another country then stand by for another 3 or 4 thousand US soldiers to die and another 20 or 30 thousand innocent people to be killed.

It must make the US people feel great that so much money is spent on war and killing, with very little (comparatively) being spent on averting "New Orleans" type disasters

We have satellites that can burn holes in concrete and steel from 150 miles out in space.

Lets hope their accuracy is better than the US 'smart' missiles that blew up and killed British troops and totalled a red cross hospital I suppose the missile saw a big red cross on the roof and thought that was the target

Col

 

[FoFa]

Oops, couple of slight mistakes there old bean, the Alliance prevented any further attempt at Kuwait and the US was hoping he'd win against Iran anyway

Ah, but it was stated he was not a threat, not, he was not a threat any longer.

 

[FoFa]

I’ve said this before, war is not the answer.
Oh don’t get me wrong, a lot of people need to die, but war is too costly.

The only long term solution to terrorism is goon squads, and bounties.

For a tenth of the cost, of that family feud between Bush and Hussein, I could've had terrorist heads stuck on the top on pikes from here to Baghdad.

Well an interesting tidbit that I actually agree with. But it aint gonna happen, and there is the problem. From the liberal on the west coast up through the UN, they would never sanction such a thing as that. So what are you left with? Diplomacy? Yea, that worked real good, and the option we took after years of nothing else really working.

 

[FoFa]

So why not assasinate him and his leadership?
Why put our children in dept for life to support this feud?

It is against our law, I think back in the 60's congress said we can't do that. The only legal way is with military might.
Now I am not saying one way or the other, just it is what it is.

 

[jsanders]

Cost of listening in to a cell phone conversation.............................$5.40
Cost of a 50 caliber round ………………………………………...$10.60
Saving 1,200,000,000,000 on a bullshit war……………………..Priceless.

 

[FoFa]

Cost of listening in to a cell phone conversation.............................$5.40
Cost of a 50 caliber round ………………………………………...$10.60
Saving 1,200,000,000,000 on a bullshit war……………………..Priceless.

I still don't get where you are saving (like a google of people by your number) or why it is a BS war. So far I have not seen any proof of that. OH you say this and that, but I see no proof. You may take someone elses word over the gov. and hence call them liers, but maybe it is the source you are listening to that is lying Lack of evidence is your proof. How ever the lack of action by terrorist against use as in the past, is not proof all of a sudden. Seems like you straddle a two sided argument with you trying to have it all your way. i will only pay attention to the things I want to beleive in, and ignore the rest.
When the Gov. thinks you have too much power, where will you be then?

 

[jsanders]

I still don't get where you are saving (like a google of people by your number) or why it is a BS war. So far I have not seen any proof of that. OH you say this and that, but I see no proof. You may take someone elses word over the gov. and hence call them liers, but maybe it is the source you are listening to that is lying Lack of evidence is your proof. How ever the lack of action by terrorist against use as in the past, is not proof all of a sudden. Seems like you straddle a two sided argument with you trying to have it all your way. i will only pay attention to the things I want to beleive in, and ignore the rest.
When the Gov. thinks you have too much power, where will you be then?

Do you honestly think the war in Iraq is the cause of the lack of terrorism?

It's the tracking of their finacial info that is leading to their demise.

The war is a vehicle for the wealth building of the Texas billionaires.

 

[jsanders]

What evidence is there that the war in Iraq has had any benifit to the US.

But it is going to cost 1.2 trillion dollars. that is a fact.

 

[Rich]

So what are you left with? Diplomacy? Yea, that worked real good, and the option we took after years of nothing else really working.

In what way do you see diplomacy as a failure in this case, do you mean because the US couldn't get it's own way?

 

[ColinEssex]

But it is going to cost 1.2 trillion dollars. that is a fact.

Thats pennies compared to what it'll cost you when you invade Iran.

Col

 

[jsanders]

Thats pennies compared to what it'll cost you when you invade Iran.

Col

First off there is no such thing a pennies measured against trillions. There are only 15 with a annual GDP of more than the cost of the war in Iraq.

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/rankorder/2001rank.html

Second an invasion into Iran will not be costly because it will be a surgical air strike to disable their enrichment capabilities.

Which, by the way, should have already happened.

15000 lb Daisy Cutters, and who gives a damn about collateral damage.

 

[ColinEssex]

an invasion into Iran will not be costly because it will be a surgical air strike to disable their enrichment capabilities.

ok, if you say so

15000 lb Daisy Cutters, and who gives a damn about collateral damage.

Apparently not the Americans thats for sure

and thanks again for confirming our thoughts that the Americans don't give a toss about anyone who gets in the way of their continuing world domination programme.

Col

 

[FoFa]

In what way do you see diplomacy as a failure in this case, do you mean because the US couldn't get it's own way?

IMO if diplomacy doesn't work in a two year time frame (give or take a little depending on the circumstance), it is a failure.