PDA

View Full Version : Top Repubs blast BushCo on Iraq


Ugly Duck
09-16-2004, 04:53 PM
Even the GOP faithful is realizing that the people who run BushCo are a buncha bumbling fools:

Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Nebraska - "It's beyond pitiful, it's beyond embarrassing, it's now in the zone of dangerous"

Taking the opposite view of BushCo's "But we're making progress" stance, Hagel instead sez that "we are in deep trouble."

Richard Lugar, R-Indiana also thinks that administration plans for rebuilding Iraq were inadequate and based on overly optimistic assumptions, saying "The nonsense of all of that is apparent. The lack of planning is apparent."

"This is an extraordinary, ineffective administrative procedure. It is exasperating from anybody looking at this from any vantage point"

Man oh man... Karl Rove is going to be pissed when he hears about fellow top Republicans saying the same thing as Kerry about BushCo's incompetence and serious twisting of the truth. Hagel & Lugar - brave enough to tell the truth in the face of the BushCo propaganda onslaught... kudos!

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/09/16/us.iraq.ap/index.html

RINGLEADER
09-16-2004, 06:28 PM
Too bad Kerry's plan amounts to...well, um, I'm not quite sure what Kerry's plan is beyond wanting to give the $18 billion he voted against to the UN.

|Zach|
09-16-2004, 06:47 PM
Too bad Kerry's plan amounts to...well, um, I'm not quite sure what Kerry's plan is beyond wanting to give the $18 billion he voted against to the UN.
I will prob be voting for Bush this election but I would feel a lot better about it if I was given good reasons to vote for Bush that have nothing to do with Kerry.

the Talking Can
09-16-2004, 07:54 PM
Too bad Kerry's plan amounts to...well, um, I'm not quite sure what Kerry's plan is beyond wanting to give the $18 billion he voted against to the UN.

so you're holding Kerry responsible for how you think he might clean up Bush's mess- if he were President- while simultaneously refusing to hold the actual President accountable for the mess he made......brilliant, and irrefutable...

the Talking Can
09-16-2004, 07:56 PM
Even the GOP faithful is realizing that the people who run BushCo are a buncha bumbling fools:

Sen. Chuck Hagel, R-Nebraska - "It's beyond pitiful, it's beyond embarrassing, it's now in the zone of dangerous"

Taking the opposite view of BushCo's "But we're making progress" stance, Hagel instead sez that "we are in deep trouble."

Richard Lugar, R-Indiana also thinks that administration plans for rebuilding Iraq were inadequate and based on overly optimistic assumptions, saying "The nonsense of all of that is apparent. The lack of planning is apparent."

"This is an extraordinary, ineffective administrative procedure. It is exasperating from anybody looking at this from any vantage point"

Man oh man... Karl Rove is going to be pissed when he hears about fellow top Republicans saying the same thing as Kerry about BushCo's incompetence and serious twisting of the truth. Hagel & Lugar - brave enough to tell the truth in the face of the BushCo propaganda onslaught... kudos!

http://www.cnn.com/2004/US/09/16/us.iraq.ap/index.html

I'm disappointed in you Duck....how dare you politicize a political issue...just because Republicans are criticizing the President doesn't mean you can...you ****ing commie...

KCWolfman
09-16-2004, 08:00 PM
so you're holding Kerry responsible for how you think he might clean up Bush's mess- if he were President- while simultaneously refusing to hold the actual President accountable for the mess he made......brilliant, and irrefutable...
And you plan on voting for a man who tells you he can clean up the mess but won't tell you how until after he is in office..... brilliant!

Mr. Kotter
09-16-2004, 08:01 PM
I will prob be voting for Bush this election but I would feel a lot better about it if I was given good reasons to vote for Bush that have nothing to do with Kerry.

Watch the debates, Zach.

Poor, little, "stupid" Georgie is gonna make his case. Just like he did against the "super debater" and much more "intelligent" Al Gore.

Mr. Kotter
09-16-2004, 08:01 PM
And you plan on voting for a man who tells you he can clean up the mess but won't tell you how until after he is in office..... brilliant!

and irrefutable!

:rolleyes:

jettio
09-16-2004, 08:31 PM
Kerry's speech today before the National Guard was solid.

He definitely has the better hand to play since it is very evident that Iraq is much worse than Bush is willing to admit.

Bush will be exposed as a man of empty promises and mistruths.

Maybe Kerry was right not to get nasty and did well to remain steady.

Karzai can't even travel for a campaign stop without having a rocket fired at his helicopter and that upcoming election in Afghanistan is a total f*ckin' farce with no political parties and the candidates having no ability to campaign.

Bush is going to push for that Afghan election as some feather in his cap, and what is going to happen is that, if the election goes forward and the press properly reports what a farce it is, Bush is going to look awful stupid and dishonest to say that it is wonderful.

Truth is Kerry's friend and that is the best friend to have.

Bush would not know the Truth if it was a brick that hit him in the head.

KCWolfman
09-16-2004, 08:32 PM
Truth is Kerry's friend and that is the best friend to have.



This has to be the most deluded statement ever made on this forum, period.

NewChief
09-16-2004, 08:34 PM
This has to be the most deluded statement ever made on this forum, period.

Dude stop wasting time here, get on the thread about W. being a Dunce, and answer the fact that he doesn't like the Grapes of Wrath. I know that's going to be a dealbreaker for you.

KCWolfman
09-16-2004, 08:39 PM
Dude stop wasting time here, get on the thread about W. being a Dunce, and answer the fact that he doesn't like the Grapes of Wrath. I know that's going to be a dealbreaker for you.
LMAO - Yeah, he's a friggin' heathen.

I will not change my vote, but I will give you rep.

MadMax
09-16-2004, 09:20 PM
Kerry's speech today before the National Guard was solid.

He definitely has the better hand to play since it is very evident that Iraq is much worse than Bush is willing to admit.

Bush will be exposed as a man of empty promises and mistruths.

Maybe Kerry was right not to get nasty and did well to remain steady.

Karzai can't even travel for a campaign stop without having a rocket fired at his helicopter and that upcoming election in Afghanistan is a total f*ckin' farce with no political parties and the candidates having no ability to campaign.

Bush is going to push for that Afghan election as some feather in his cap, and what is going to happen is that, if the election goes forward and the press properly reports what a farce it is, Bush is going to look awful stupid and dishonest to say that it is wonderful.

Truth is Kerry's friend and that is the best friend to have.




Skerry's speach before the National Guard got a VERY negative response according to all acounts. Watch the news if you don't believe me :rolleyes: Ahhh what's the point, you spew lies and claim them truths, you are a joke, as your sorry assed party has become... Jackasses without souls!!!!!!!!!!

Bush would not know the Truth if it was a brick that hit him in the head.


Skerry is a "brick" that would not know the truth if it hit him in the head!!

MadMax
09-16-2004, 09:27 PM
And you plan on voting for a man who tells you he can clean up the mess but won't tell you how until after he is in office..... brilliant!


Shhhhh! it's secret and well er uh umm "more sensitive" BTW who the hell are you to question me on anything I am JFK by god.

marsaray
09-16-2004, 09:28 PM
Kerry is a vietnom vetren who won three purple hearts and wears flip flops.
There is nothing more honest than that.

Donger
09-16-2004, 10:47 PM
Kerry's speech today before the National Guard was solid.

He definitely has the better hand to play since it is very evident that Iraq is much worse than Bush is willing to admit.

Bush will be exposed as a man of empty promises and mistruths.

Maybe Kerry was right not to get nasty and did well to remain steady.

Karzai can't even travel for a campaign stop without having a rocket fired at his helicopter and that upcoming election in Afghanistan is a total f*ckin' farce with no political parties and the candidates having no ability to campaign.

Bush is going to push for that Afghan election as some feather in his cap, and what is going to happen is that, if the election goes forward and the press properly reports what a farce it is, Bush is going to look awful stupid and dishonest to say that it is wonderful.

Truth is Kerry's friend and that is the best friend to have.

Bush would not know the Truth if it was a brick that hit him in the head.

That has got to be one of the most bizarre posts I've ever seen here.

Do you liberals actually think, or just emote?

jettio
09-16-2004, 11:10 PM
That has got to be one of the most bizarre posts I've ever seen here.

Do you liberals actually think, or just emote?


Biatch,

I ain't a liberal.

I am somebody that expects the greatest country in the world to have a better leader than the incompetent and duplicitous fool that is going to be fired.

He is a failure and you need to remember your current attitude 6 weeks from now.

There are plenty of folks on Chiefs Planet that used to be pro-Bush and who now stay far away from this sub-forum because of the mindless Bush ratifying loozers that populate it.

It is going to be a cold winter for the Bushes this year, maybe his regular guy azz will invite fools like you to a Bar B Q.

I doubt it. Once he is ousted, he will go back to being the snob that he truly is.

Donger
09-16-2004, 11:40 PM
Biatch,

I ain't a liberal.

I am somebody that expects the greatest country in the world to have a better leader than the incompetent and duplicitous fool that is going to be fired.

He is a failure and you need to remember your current attitude 6 weeks from now.

There are plenty of folks on Chiefs Planet that used to be pro-Bush and who now stay far away from this sub-forum because of the mindless Bush ratifying loozers that populate it.

It is going to be a cold winter for the Bushes this year, maybe his regular guy azz will invite fools like you to a Bar B Q.

I doubt it. Once he is ousted, he will go back to being the snob that he truly is.

I guess it's just emote.

Jenson17
09-17-2004, 12:05 AM
....
There are plenty of folks on Chiefs Planet that used to be pro-Bush and who now stay far away from this sub-forum because of the mindless Bush ratifying loozers that populate it.
..

Could you provide examples...names of such individuals. I'm really curious to see if you are right, or just making it up as you go.

You say you aren't a liberal. Really? I've lurked here for a long time, and boy....you coulda fooled me.

Also, do you talk to everyone that way? In person too? Just curious...thanks in advance. :thumb:

Jenson17
09-17-2004, 12:11 AM
I guess it's just emote. This dude's head is gonna explode if Kerry doesn't win....

Ugly Duck
09-17-2004, 12:16 AM
Even the Repubs are slamming BushCo's incompetence and dishonesty.. but not a word about it from the Planeteer Party Faithfuls. Not even the usual "They actually meant something completely different from what they said." Not even some incredibly convoluted logic about how the Repubs were actually praising BushCo. I'm going back to football....

Jenson17
09-17-2004, 12:17 AM
Even the Repubs are slamming BushCo's incompetence and dishonesty.. but not a word about it from the Planeteer Party Faithfuls. Not even the usual "They actually meant something completely different from what they said." Not even some incredibly convoluted logic about how the Repubs were actually praising BushCo. I'm going back to football....

Lugar and Sasser are the Republican version of Zell Miller.

Next?

the Talking Can
09-17-2004, 04:29 AM
Lugar and Sasser are the Republican version of Zell Miller.

Next?

you mean they're as respected by republicans as Zell Miller, who was a keynote speaker at the RNC?

Chuck Hagel?....another Zell?

tiptap
09-17-2004, 08:38 AM
And you plan on voting for a man who tells you he can clean up the mess but won't tell you how until after he is in office..... brilliant!

You don't like the choice Kerry offers. The isolationist conservative, who wants to do it alone, doesn't want to see the advantage in having the good will and cooperative efforts of the rest of the world in fighting terrorism. I never understand conservatives. They seem always to talk up the success of American business as the apex of cooperative undertaking. They wail against bad press for the undertakings of the admistration because it undermines support. But it is OK to lose this very asset it if exists anywhere else in the world because it requires a more astute and refined hand than this administration is capable of displaying to lead but not act alone.

Mr. Kotter
09-17-2004, 08:41 AM
You don't like the choice Kerry offers. The isolationist conservative, who wants to do it alone, doesn't want to see the advantage in having the good will and cooperative efforts of the rest of the world in fighting terrorism. I never understand conservatives. They seem always to talk up the success of American business as the apex of cooperative undertaking. They wail against bad press for the undertakings of the admistration because it undermines support. But it is OK to lose this very asset it if exists anywhere else in the world because it requires a more astute and refined hand than this administration is capable of displaying to lead but not act alone.

You're right. Let's surrender our national sovereignty to the United Nations. The track record for success that organization has enjoyed over the years should help alleviate any concerns we may have... :rolleyes:

mlyonsd
09-17-2004, 08:50 AM
Even the Repubs are slamming BushCo's incompetence and dishonesty.. but not a word about it from the Planeteer Party Faithfuls. Not even the usual "They actually meant something completely different from what they said." Not even some incredibly convoluted logic about how the Repubs were actually praising BushCo. I'm going back to football....

I have no problem with Luger and Hagle speaking up. I'd say they are at least partially right. Things aren't going as planned in Iraq. Bush doesn't want to admit that with an election coming up in 6 weeks.

It's time to do the right thing, whatever that is. If that means listening to Luger/Hagle/Biden the Bush administration should do it. There's too much at stake.

HC_Chief
09-17-2004, 09:05 AM
A free Iraq is a noble cause, but it's just so <i>haarrd</i>

tiptap
09-17-2004, 11:09 AM
You're right. Let's surrender our national sovereignty to the United Nations. The track record for success that organization has enjoyed over the years should help alleviate any concerns we may have... :rolleyes:

I write that we need to cooperate and that is spun to a wish to give away sovereignty. How convenient. The judgement of our European allies that there were no WMD has been validated. Despite being on the ground for over a year the US has not found any large cache of WMD. And the small evidence of chemical weapons all point to the weapons provided by the US (Iraq Iran War). The productive capacity of Iraq was nil.

Bush managed to get the inspection process back up and running and then chose not to believe the inspections. His judgement was wrong and the cost is a KNOWN 200 Billion and rising, 1000+ Americans dead and thousands more wounded. This is in exchange for a SUPPOSED prevented larger carnage on US soil by acting as occupier of an Arab country.

I have not forgotten the deaths of 9/11. I applaud Bush's early actions in Afganistan. Here was a chance and location to hone our skills in removing insurgents and finding terrorists. Here was a chance to make good on a promise of changing a rogue nation into a productive one. We had terrorist ideals on the defensive as well as their leaders. Instead of showing resolve and determination for the tough and tricky job of cleaning up in Afganistan, Bush chose to create a new, larger and polemic undertaking that has been poorly planned in just those areas we neglected in Afganistan.

For me I can not reward such hubris with my vote.

KCWolfman
09-17-2004, 12:31 PM
You don't like the choice Kerry offers. The isolationist conservative, who wants to do it alone, doesn't want to see the advantage in having the good will and cooperative efforts of the rest of the world in fighting terrorism. I never understand conservatives. They seem always to talk up the success of American business as the apex of cooperative undertaking. They wail against bad press for the undertakings of the admistration because it undermines support. But it is OK to lose this very asset it if exists anywhere else in the world because it requires a more astute and refined hand than this administration is capable of displaying to lead but not act alone.
What would be different in Iraq today if the French and Germans supported our cause over a year ago?

KCWolfman
09-17-2004, 12:33 PM
I write that we need to cooperate and that is spun to a wish to give away sovereignty. How convenient. The judgement of our European allies that there were no WMD has been validated. Despite being on the ground for over a year the US has not found any large cache of WMD. And the small evidence of chemical weapons all point to the weapons provided by the US (Iraq Iran War). The productive capacity of Iraq was nil.

Bush managed to get the inspection process back up and running and then chose not to believe the inspections. His judgement was wrong and the cost is a KNOWN 200 Billion and rising, 1000+ Americans dead and thousands more wounded. This is in exchange for a SUPPOSED prevented larger carnage on US soil by acting as occupier of an Arab country.

I have not forgotten the deaths of 9/11. I applaud Bush's early actions in Afganistan. Here was a chance and location to hone our skills in removing insurgents and finding terrorists. Here was a chance to make good on a promise of changing a rogue nation into a productive one. We had terrorist ideals on the defensive as well as their leaders. Instead of showing resolve and determination for the tough and tricky job of cleaning up in Afganistan, Bush chose to create a new, larger and polemic undertaking that has been poorly planned in just those areas we neglected in Afganistan.

For me I can not reward such hubris with my vote.
When did the judgement you speak of occur? Talk about revisionism! I seem to remember the UN unequivocally stating that Hussein had given no reason to believe he had disarmed and that inspections should be allowed to go forward.

Now why would the UN need inspections if you believed there were no WMDs?

Radar Chief
09-17-2004, 01:25 PM
What would be different in Iraq today if the French and Germans supported our cause over a year ago?

Surely he’s not referring to the “allies” that were supplying the enemy while we were fighting them.

tiptap
09-17-2004, 02:02 PM
When did the judgement you speak of occur? Talk about revisionism! I seem to remember the UN unequivocally stating that Hussein had given no reason to believe he had disarmed and that inspections should be allowed to go forward.

Now why would the UN need inspections if you believed there were no WMDs?

The inspections had been suspended. And under George W. Bush's correct pressure, they were resumed (though one wonders if Bush had thought Sadam would never agree to new inspections and therefore would be held in greater suspicion of actually having WMD justifying invasion). The inspections resumed because the earlier set of inspections had presented strong, though not irresputable, evidence that Saddam capability to acquire or maintain WMD had greatly deteriorated under the UN sanctioned embargoes. And it was proper, given the propensities for Sadam to acquire WMD and to seek to do US harm, to monitor again whether this had changed in the intervening time while inspections were suspended in light of 9/11. And the world and UN moved to monitor that Sadam had not rebuilt or acquired anew such weapons. So the inspectors were put on ground to do their job. A job that found no evidence that Saddam had been any more successful in the time since the previous round of inspections had ceased (because the embargo had always been in place). IN JUDGEMENT, THE INSPECTORS FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF WMD. And in light of their lack of evidence, even with US directed inquiries on the ground of assured sites, it became expedient not to allow the inspections to go on and undermine what suspicion existed as to Sadam CAPABILITIES (no one questions his desire to do harm) and therefore justification for action. The question was one of a REAL AND PRESENT DANGER and not preemptive mind reading when no capability existed.
The present administration then went to great lengths to discredit the job and evidence of the inspectors with the intent to muster support for removing Sadam as a threat because he was deemed to want to have WMD. And yet in their lust to remove Sadam they lacked the foresight to govern the aftermath of his removal. Having failed to secure Afganistan a true democratic standing throughout that country, they put the same short-sightedness to task in even a larger populated country of Iraq. And this time with the front line troops at every stage, singularly and exposed, Americans.

The thrust of these words is that on balance the administration has failed to win the peace for either country where it has had military intervention. And the cost, the real cost, is upward of 1000 American lives and 200 billion dollars. It is a dear cost for so little real return. Imagine what you want as presumed savings in innocent lives for none of the 9/11 terrorists where from Iraq. I would have had those thousand lives alive and employed in protecting our borders and harbors and that 200 billion in buying Medical expertise in fighting disease both of natural and human origin and so be vigilant and resolute to meet a terrorist threat.

the Talking Can
09-17-2004, 02:29 PM
The inspections had been suspended. And under George W. Bush's correct pressure, they were resumed (though one wonders if Bush had thought Sadam would never agree to new inspections and therefore would be held in greater suspicion of actually having WMD justifying invasion). The inspections resumed because the earlier set of inspections had presented strong, though not irresputable, evidence that Saddam capability to acquire or maintain WMD had greatly deteriorated under the UN sanctioned embargoes. And it was proper, given the propensities for Sadam to acquire WMD and to seek to do US harm, to monitor again whether this had changed in the intervening time while inspections were suspended in light of 9/11. And the world and UN moved to monitor that Sadam had not rebuilt or acquired anew such weapons. So the inspectors were put on ground to do their job. A job that found no evidence that Saddam had been any more successful in the time since the previous round of inspections had ceased (because the embargo had always been in place). IN JUDGEMENT, THE INSPECTORS FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF WMD. And in light of their lack of evidence, even with US directed inquiries on the ground of assured sites, it became expedient not to allow the inspections to go on and undermine what suspicion existed as to Sadam CAPABILITIES (no one questions his desire to do harm) and therefore justification for action. The question was one of a REAL AND PRESENT DANGER and not preemptive mind reading when no capability existed.
The present administration then went to great lengths to discredit the job and evidence of the inspectors with the intent to muster support for removing Sadam as a threat because he was deemed to want to have WMD. And yet in their lust to remove Sadam they lacked the foresight to govern the aftermath of his removal. Having failed to secure Afganistan a true democratic standing throughout that country, they put the same short-sightedness to task in even a larger populated country of Iraq. And this time with the front line troops at every stage, singularly and exposed, Americans.

The thrust of these words is that on balance the administration has failed to win the peace for either country where it has had military intervention. And the cost, the real cost, is upward of 1000 American lives and 200 billion dollars. It is a dear cost for so little real return. Imagine what you want as presumed savings in innocent lives for none of the 9/11 terrorists where from Iraq. I would have had those thousand lives alive and employed in protecting our borders and harbors and that 200 billion in buying Medical expertise in fighting disease both of natural and human origin and so be vigilant and resolute to meet a terrorist threat.

you're much too coherent to be posting on this forum, who let you in?


(count down till you're accused of politicizing a political issue...3.....2.....1...)

mlyonsd
09-17-2004, 02:45 PM
The judgement of our European allies that there were no WMD has been validated.

I don't agree with that assessment. UN resolution 1441 is clear that the worlds concern was that Saddam still had them because he would not prove otherwise.

http://http://www.un.int/usa/sres-iraq.htm

I guess Bush has more influence in the UN then I first thought. He evidently got them to sign a resolution they didn't believe in.

KCWolfman
09-17-2004, 03:05 PM
The inspections had been suspended. And under George W. Bush's correct pressure, they were resumed (though one wonders if Bush had thought Sadam would never agree to new inspections and therefore would be held in greater suspicion of actually having WMD justifying invasion). The inspections resumed because the earlier set of inspections had presented strong, though not irresputable, evidence that Saddam capability to acquire or maintain WMD had greatly deteriorated under the UN sanctioned embargoes. And it was proper, given the propensities for Sadam to acquire WMD and to seek to do US harm, to monitor again whether this had changed in the intervening time while inspections were suspended in light of 9/11. And the world and UN moved to monitor that Sadam had not rebuilt or acquired anew such weapons. So the inspectors were put on ground to do their job. A job that found no evidence that Saddam had been any more successful in the time since the previous round of inspections had ceased (because the embargo had always been in place). IN JUDGEMENT, THE INSPECTORS FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF WMD. And in light of their lack of evidence, even with US directed inquiries on the ground of assured sites, it became expedient not to allow the inspections to go on and undermine what suspicion existed as to Sadam CAPABILITIES (no one questions his desire to do harm) and therefore justification for action. The question was one of a REAL AND PRESENT DANGER and not preemptive mind reading when no capability existed.
The present administration then went to great lengths to discredit the job and evidence of the inspectors with the intent to muster support for removing Sadam as a threat because he was deemed to want to have WMD. And yet in their lust to remove Sadam they lacked the foresight to govern the aftermath of his removal. Having failed to secure Afganistan a true democratic standing throughout that country, they put the same short-sightedness to task in even a larger populated country of Iraq. And this time with the front line troops at every stage, singularly and exposed, Americans.

The thrust of these words is that on balance the administration has failed to win the peace for either country where it has had military intervention. And the cost, the real cost, is upward of 1000 American lives and 200 billion dollars. It is a dear cost for so little real return. Imagine what you want as presumed savings in innocent lives for none of the 9/11 terrorists where from Iraq. I would have had those thousand lives alive and employed in protecting our borders and harbors and that 200 billion in buying Medical expertise in fighting disease both of natural and human origin and so be vigilant and resolute to meet a terrorist threat.
Oh, he got the inspections started again... well that isn't a song and dance we have heard for 12 years straight.

I knew a guy that dated a girl for 2 years strictly to get in her pants. She kept promising, but never delivering. Your statement reminds me of him and his blind acceptance for 24 months.

KCTitus
09-17-2004, 03:08 PM
I knew a guy that dated a girl for 2 years strictly to get in her pants. She kept promising, but never delivering. Your statement reminds me of him and his blind acceptance for 24 months.

That's perseverance...

KCWolfman
09-17-2004, 03:11 PM
That's perseverance...
No, it is stupidity. He hated the girl, but she was so hot he kept waiting.

Just like the people who keep telling us sanctions and inspections would eventually work. Meanwhile the only people affected by the sanctions were the common people and the only people who believed that the inspections would ever be 100% complete were the same ones wearing purple Nikes and awaiting the second coming on Halle Boppe.

jettio
09-17-2004, 05:53 PM
Could you provide examples...names of such individuals. I'm really curious to see if you are right, or just making it up as you go.

You say you aren't a liberal. Really? I've lurked here for a long time, and boy....you coulda fooled me.

Also, do you talk to everyone that way? In person too? Just curious...thanks in advance. :thumb:

I am not going to waste my time answering somebody that recently joined about the board's history.

Who do you think you are?

Look it up yourself.

Jenson17
09-17-2004, 06:04 PM
I am not going to waste my time answering somebody that recently joined about the board's history.

Who do you think you are?

Look it up yourself.

Waste your time?.....you make a generalization, and fail to back it up. Then insult me as a "newbie." :shake:

I'm just a guy trying to see if I'm missin' somethin', which I don't think I am....or whether you are just runnin' your hateful mouth.

I don't know how I'd proceed to "look it up" when YOU made the claim, so I have no idea where to begin. I was simply lookin' for evidence of your claim....which apparently you don't have.

jettio
09-17-2004, 06:05 PM
The inspections had been suspended. And under George W. Bush's correct pressure, they were resumed (though one wonders if Bush had thought Sadam would never agree to new inspections and therefore would be held in greater suspicion of actually having WMD justifying invasion). The inspections resumed because the earlier set of inspections had presented strong, though not irresputable, evidence that Saddam capability to acquire or maintain WMD had greatly deteriorated under the UN sanctioned embargoes. And it was proper, given the propensities for Sadam to acquire WMD and to seek to do US harm, to monitor again whether this had changed in the intervening time while inspections were suspended in light of 9/11. And the world and UN moved to monitor that Sadam had not rebuilt or acquired anew such weapons. So the inspectors were put on ground to do their job. A job that found no evidence that Saddam had been any more successful in the time since the previous round of inspections had ceased (because the embargo had always been in place). IN JUDGEMENT, THE INSPECTORS FOUND NO EVIDENCE OF WMD. And in light of their lack of evidence, even with US directed inquiries on the ground of assured sites, it became expedient not to allow the inspections to go on and undermine what suspicion existed as to Sadam CAPABILITIES (no one questions his desire to do harm) and therefore justification for action. The question was one of a REAL AND PRESENT DANGER and not preemptive mind reading when no capability existed.
The present administration then went to great lengths to discredit the job and evidence of the inspectors with the intent to muster support for removing Sadam as a threat because he was deemed to want to have WMD. And yet in their lust to remove Sadam they lacked the foresight to govern the aftermath of his removal. Having failed to secure Afganistan a true democratic standing throughout that country, they put the same short-sightedness to task in even a larger populated country of Iraq. And this time with the front line troops at every stage, singularly and exposed, Americans.

The thrust of these words is that on balance the administration has failed to win the peace for either country where it has had military intervention. And the cost, the real cost, is upward of 1000 American lives and 200 billion dollars. It is a dear cost for so little real return. Imagine what you want as presumed savings in innocent lives for none of the 9/11 terrorists where from Iraq. I would have had those thousand lives alive and employed in protecting our borders and harbors and that 200 billion in buying Medical expertise in fighting disease both of natural and human origin and so be vigilant and resolute to meet a terrorist threat.


That is very good.

It is very clear that this whole Iraq fiasco was primarily a long term plan that was founded on mistaken assumptions about the sociopolitical realities in that region.

Stooges were afraid to present their long term plan at face value and have our country truly approve the effort democratically.

They mislead to get approval for a mission that they have botched because of arrogance and stupidity.

Even their plans to make their connected friends rich with contracts has hit some rough spots because of the total lack of security.

Power must be intoxicating, :bong: because you would have to really be soused and polluted to f*ck up that bad and not realize it.

jettio
09-17-2004, 06:15 PM
Waste your time?.....you make a generalization, and fail to back it up. Then insult me as a "newbie." :shake:

I'm just a guy trying to see if I'm missin' somethin', which I don't think I am....or whether you are just runnin' your hateful mouth.

I don't know how I'd proceed to "look it up" when YOU made the claim, so I have no idea where to begin. I was simply lookin' for evidence of your claim....which apparently you don't have.

Look for it somewhere else, like the archives.


You must be a real narcissistic person.

You are right on ignore, I don't converse with folks that are so narcissistic that they think nobody has anything better to do than to prove their experiential knowledge against your admittedly uninformed assumptions.

Go admire yourself. I am done with you.

OldTownChief
09-17-2004, 06:17 PM
Waste your time?.....you make a generalization, and fail to back it up. Then insult me as a "newbie." :shake:

I'm just a guy trying to see if I'm missin' somethin', which I don't think I am....or whether you are just runnin' your hateful mouth.

I don't know how I'd proceed to "look it up" when YOU made the claim, so I have no idea where to begin. I was simply lookin' for evidence of your claim....which apparently you don't have.


You will learn all about "smiley boy" pretty quick and that wasting time with this classless loser is equivalent to flushing sh!t down the toilet. And no, he doesnt talk to you face to face this way. Just ask him.

Jenson17
09-17-2004, 06:22 PM
.... It is a dear cost for so little real return...

Tell that to the people of Afghanistan and Iraq whose children and families were, every day under the Taliban and Sadam, in fear of their lives, with no hope of ever achieving the goal of a democratic society. More importantly, there are two less countries harboring terrorists who threaten our interests.

While we are not yet close to our goals there, we are much further than if we had done nothing. These two countries also now have hope for a much brighter future than they would have had otherwise; and much sooner than if someone other than Bush had been President.

JMHO.

OldTownChief
09-17-2004, 06:35 PM
Waste your time?.....you make a generalization, and fail to back it up. Then insult me as a "newbie." :shake:

I'm just a guy trying to see if I'm missin' somethin', which I don't think I am....or whether you are just runnin' your hateful mouth.

I don't know how I'd proceed to "look it up" when YOU made the claim, so I have no idea where to begin. I was simply lookin' for evidence of your claim....which apparently you don't have.

When the moron figures out he's out matched he will put you on ignore and run away. As I see from his next post to you, he's probably done just that. I waiting for a "little whinny b!tch" smiley to be created in his name.

jettio
09-17-2004, 06:36 PM
You will learn all about "smiley boy" pretty quick and that wasting time with this classless loser is equivalent to flushing sh!t down the toilet. And no, he doesnt talk to you face to face this way. Just ask him.


If you did not answer this post below after you confronted me, don't act like you want to rescue somebody else. Both of you can have a blast in iggy-ville. I won't read your posts, and you won't have to read mine if you avail yourself of the same feature.

I am not going to read your response, but if you think it was cool of that azzwipe to challenge me about the board history before his arrival and act as if I was required to prove that history to him then you just have no conception of fairness or equality.

Maybe you could admire Jenson17 while he admires himself.

Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally Posted by OldTownChief
Hey jettio...........
You can use a thread started by shithead about the loss of life as a tool to talk "smack"? You sick ****. How much I would love to meet you face to face one day. Your stupid looking sig pic would look like one of my daughters tea parties.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jettio----------------------------

The Bushianandos spend most of their time ignoring deaths and injuries from the folly in Iraq, how was I to know that this was the once a year solemnity thread?

As for being inappropriate dragging your dad's corpse into a discussion that already had the features that you are now complaining about was quite degrading and especially inappropriate. :thailor:

If your dad was a man of honor, he sure did not pass it on to you, he might be interested in learning how the National Intelligence Estimate and its evaluation of the prospects in Iraq are very much at variance with the Bush-Cheney campaign trail BS.

http://www.kansascity.com/mld/kansascity/9674407.htm

No surprise there, Bush-Cheney are not noted for their honor, especially
when it comes to favorite topic to lie about, Iraq.


As to meeting you, no thanks. When your daughter is ready to have a real tea party, make the most of it, tiger. :hump:

KCWolfman
09-17-2004, 06:45 PM
Look for it somewhere else, like the archives.


You must be a real narcissistic person.

You are right on ignore, I don't converse with folks that are so narcissistic that they think nobody has anything better to do than to prove their experiential knowledge against your admittedly uninformed assumptions.

Go admire yourself. I am done with you.
Wow, if that isn't flat calling glossy black, I don't know what is.

Calcountry
09-17-2004, 06:52 PM
I will prob be voting for Bush this election but I would feel a lot better about it if I was given good reasons to vote for Bush that have nothing to do with Kerry.
I will give you one reason. He kept the country together through difficult circumstances. Bush has governed from the center, I know, I detest some of his spending that he has signed into law. The left hates him. Hmmm, the right is disappointed, and the left Hates, that means Bush is in the center.

Which party was the first to pull everyone back apart for political reasons?

Calcountry
09-17-2004, 06:56 PM
Kerry's speech today before the National Guard was solid.

He definitely has the better hand to play since it is very evident that Iraq is much worse than Bush is willing to admit.

Bush will be exposed as a man of empty promises and mistruths.

Maybe Kerry was right not to get nasty and did well to remain steady.

Karzai can't even travel for a campaign stop without having a rocket fired at his helicopter and that upcoming election in Afghanistan is a total f*ckin' farce with no political parties and the candidates having no ability to campaign.

Bush is going to push for that Afghan election as some feather in his cap, and what is going to happen is that, if the election goes forward and the press properly reports what a farce it is, Bush is going to look awful stupid and dishonest to say that it is wonderful.

Truth is Kerry's friend and that is the best friend to have.

Bush would not know the Truth if it was a brick that hit him in the head.
I saw a report yesterday that involved 3 engagements in Iraq: One, a car bomber was sniped before they could detonate at maximum effectiveness resulting only in injuries to the intended victims, the slime died though.

The other 2 the bad guys also got shredded, no casualties on the American side. If that MOTHER FUGGER Rather would report the truth RATHER than make up chit you would notice that our Troops are kicking ass and taking names under difficult circumstances.

Calcountry
09-17-2004, 07:01 PM
Biatch,

I ain't a liberal.

I am somebody that expects the greatest country in the world to have a better leader than the incompetent and duplicitous fool that is going to be fired.

He is a failure and you need to remember your current attitude 6 weeks from now.

There are plenty of folks on Chiefs Planet that used to be pro-Bush and who now stay far away from this sub-forum because of the mindless Bush ratifying loozers that populate it.

It is going to be a cold winter for the Bushes this year, maybe his regular guy azz will invite fools like you to a Bar B Q.

I doubt it. Once he is ousted, he will go back to being the snob that he truly is.
That one is bookmarked BIOTCH. See you Novemeber 3rd.

OldTownChief
09-17-2004, 07:25 PM
If you did not answer this post below

I didn't read any questions in your post to answer, you mindless twit, but if God would have givin you more than the brains of a crowbar you would have known that already. You re-posting what you said to me just backs my argument as to what you are.

While you were in the archives did you happen to run across any of your little gems. Here's just one of them.

http://www.chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?p=1767502#post1767502

If I posted links to all of the threads you threatened to "put you on ignore" it would shut the server down, when are you going to do it? You sound like a little cry baby girl.....Are you? aaaahhhhhhh a girly mauns aaaahhhhhhhh

OldTownChief
09-17-2004, 07:27 PM
Does anyone have the link to the thread when jettio posted that Bush was going to nuke one of our cities to get re-elected? Someone had it in their sig for somewhere around 3 weeks.

tiptap
09-17-2004, 08:27 PM
No, it is stupidity. He hated the girl, but she was so hot he kept waiting.

Just like the people who keep telling us sanctions and inspections would eventually work. Meanwhile the only people affected by the sanctions were the common people and the only people who believed that the inspections would ever be 100% complete were the same ones wearing purple Nikes and awaiting the second coming on Halle Boppe.

Sadam is like this girl who promised sex and failed to deliver. And like Sadam, this girl kept the aura of both having the goods and not quite proving. And like this girl, Sadam could not afford to be completely honest because the illusion was important in maintaining control at home if not abroad. Sadam like this girl didn't really have the goods (the girl for her part was a transexual who hadn't wacked it off yet and so had good reason to let the illusion continue).

So next time you make up a analogy instead of addressing the facts (that being NO WMD HAVE BEEN FOUND) please leave the dressing up and down alone and stick with the naked facts.

OldTownChief
09-17-2004, 09:47 PM
:hmmm: The gurly man lurks but doesn't post? :shrug: I must be on ignore.... :thumb: :rolleyes:

Maybe he/she is working on another brilliant masterpiece Stooges

OldTownChief
09-17-2004, 09:59 PM
Girly mans next move

http://home.earthlink.net/~eglweb/girlyman.JPG

tiptap
09-18-2004, 11:05 AM
Tell that to the people of Afghanistan and Iraq whose children and families were, every day under the Taliban and Sadam, in fear of their lives, with no hope of ever achieving the goal of a democratic society. More importantly, there are two less countries harboring terrorists who threaten our interests.

While we are not yet close to our goals there, we are much further than if we had done nothing. These two countries also now have hope for a much brighter future than they would have had otherwise; and much sooner than if someone other than Bush had been President.

JMHO.

Your understanding of Afgahnistan and Iraq is naive. It parallels the simple one mindedness of this administration. It does not concieve that people can be of good counscious and disagree with them. You concieve your concepts are pure so your actions are unblemished. You've come to bring democracy and American democracy at that that adds protection for all individuals and brought to those who are hungry for such abstractions. And not that they may truly be just physically hungry. Or lack water or movement without fear of harm. And because we fight the battles one removes the local people from being invested in such a difficult undertaking as a working democracy.

Please, for 40 years when we were fighting the Cold War we were expedient to supporting of despots as long as they opposed the Soviet Union. We did not practice promoting protection of rights and true oppositional democracies. This isn't the notions guiding the NeoCons concepts. They are of Cold War thinking that we want friendly nations not hostile ones. That is the reasoning driving the NeoCons. That type of thinking is planning to win the last kind of war. This enemy draws its rationalization in a similar way, with different goals, as all religious zealots do with a conviction that they know the answers and god is on their side. communism looked to state as the governing power, not our present protagonists. They are not married to states but to a narrow, fundamentalist religious position.

I have and had no objections to our military intervention in Afghanistan.
I object to this administrations expediture of resources in lives and material to verify with little enough more certainty what the EVIDENCE indicated to us before the war in Iraq: THE EMBARGO AND INSPECTIONS GREATLY DEGRADED SADAM'S ABILITY TO OBTAIN IN ANY MANNER WMD.
This administration has shown either poor judgment or poor execution or both.

Either they were right that there were caches of WMD and have been incompetent in securing them against falling into nefarious hands or they have shown an inane lack of judgement to have expended 1000's of lives and 100 of billions of dollars to verify what the rest of the world judged prudent, that the embargoes and inspections were effective. The proof in this administration lay in words from phone conversations and paper trails. The physical evidence was wanting. When people chose to make decisions based upon words and not physical evidence they do so at all our peril.

That is 1000's of lives and hundreds of billions of dollar to feel so little difference in comfort about the chance of another terrorist strike on US soil. I would have wanted those 100,000 Americans and 100's of billions of our money here to interdict threats and to respond to attacks here.

jettio
09-18-2004, 11:12 AM
Be interesting to see how the upcoming farcical fiasco of an election in the purportedly utopian Afghanistan will turn out and how accurately it will be reported.

Pitt Gorilla
09-18-2004, 05:04 PM
:hmmm: The gurly man lurks but doesn't post? :shrug: I must be on ignore.... :thumb: :rolleyes:

Maybe he/she is working on another brilliant masterpiece StoogesWow, you should really get over yourself; I know pissing matches are your thing, but this is just silly.

OldTownChief
09-18-2004, 07:06 PM
Wow, you should really get over yourself; I know pissing matches are your thing, but this is just silly.


Hell I was done with this thread almost 24 hrs. ago. nlm

KCWolfman
09-19-2004, 12:28 AM
Sadam is like this girl who promised sex and failed to deliver. And like Sadam, this girl kept the aura of both having the goods and not quite proving. And like this girl, Sadam could not afford to be completely honest because the illusion was important in maintaining control at home if not abroad. Sadam like this girl didn't really have the goods (the girl for her part was a transexual who hadn't wacked it off yet and so had good reason to let the illusion continue).

So next time you make up a analogy instead of addressing the facts (that being NO WMD HAVE BEEN FOUND) please leave the dressing up and down alone and stick with the naked facts.
I thought I did. I will be more direct this time:

The inspections promise is sh*t and any who believes that inspections and sanctions would work after 12 years of failed attempts to do so is either party-led by the nose or just plain stupid.

tiptap
09-20-2004, 08:08 AM
I thought I did. I will be more direct this time:

The inspections promise is sh*t and any who believes that inspections and sanctions would work after 12 years of failed attempts to do so is either party-led by the nose or just plain stupid.

But it is still all in your head, like your story. The proof that the embargo was ineffective, that the inspections had no validity, would have been that stores of WMD, assembled and ready to use, that would have been discovered with the defeat of Sadam.

What was found was the whiff's of the WMD stash that the US sold to Sadam under the Reagan administration. And this material was degraded to the level that it was worthless.

Or the more ominous conclusion. That in invading Iraq, we failed to control the cache and we delivered into the black market the stores of WMD.

It is at least understandable that you were taken in by the bluff Sadam portrayed during those 12 years, that he had WMD and could generate them himself (not delivered by the Reagan Adm.). What is not understandable is that you continue to be decieved by this crony's same echoed lies now when the evidence, the physical evidence of material, both finished product and manufactoring industry, is zilch.

The evidence, not words of a meglomaniacal despot, but physical evidence of real capability, supports that the embargo and inspections were successful in removing WMD from Sadam's arsenal and in addition the embargo was successful in degrading the rest of Sadam's military, making a walk-over to Bagdad the result of US invasion.

I think you, like your friend, are still lost in your obsessions.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 08:42 AM
But it is still all in your head, like your story. The proof that the embargo was ineffective, that the inspections had no validity, would have been that stores of WMD, assembled and ready to use, that would have been discovered with the defeat of Sadam.

What was found was the whiff's of the WMD stash that the US sold to Sadam under the Reagan administration. And this material was degraded to the level that it was worthless.


Wait a minute, I thought you just got through posting that there “were no WMDs”, or are you just setting yourself up to bitch no matter what the results?

I think you, like your friend, are still lost in your obsession.

:LOL:

tiptap
09-20-2004, 08:46 AM
Looking at the situation in Irag without obsessions and politics, there is a ever larger chorus of Republicans saying that we do not have enough foot soldiers on the ground in Iraq. That this short-fall in planning the occupation, will now lead to even a larger number of soldiers needed to restore order in Iraq. Not just a number larger that would have been adequate initially to control Iraq but 10 of thousands more than those levels to get back to that place when Bagdad fell.

I can not vote for an administration that was so wrong in their assessment of Iraq physical capability, in their judgement of the effectiveness of world embargoes and inspections or in their ability to plan for occupation that they so desperately wanted.

The present cost for their poor judgement is the real loss of a 1000 Americans and the expediture of 200 billion dollars and concern within his own party that their experiment in securing a lasting ally is failing. No cache of WMD discoverd, only the meglomaniacal wishes of a pathetic despot in Sadam. This administration is blinded by rhetoric, their own and the shrill cries of desperate men and does not have the objectivity to judge reality of the situation. They are too willing to pay too dear a price for so little gain.

Having gotten us into this mess with their bad choices, it may be judged necessary by rational men to muster a true effort to win the peace in Iraq and call up more troops. But to REWARD another term to these men, who SADDLED us with such an ONEROUS CONDITION, flies in the face of credulity and measure of responsibility.

tiptap
09-20-2004, 09:17 AM
Wait a minute, I thought you just got through posting that there “were no WMDs”, or are you just setting yourself up to bitch no matter what the results?



:LOL:

Yep this is a no win situation for the administration but it isn't just my conclusion. The most recent report by the US on the ground inspections, is that there are no WMD in Iraq. That there were probably not any in Iraq for some time, that they had no manufactoring capability. What was there came from the supplies sold to Iraq by Reagan Adm., with this small possible caveat THAT THE WMD MIGHT HAVE BEEN MOVED TO SYRIA DURING THE IRAQ INVASION. So if you want to laugh about the seriousness of this possible failure of this administration's ability to remove without doubt WMD go right ahead.

Now if it is any comfort, I think this administration insisted that this rather unprobable assessment be included in the report as some sort of political cover for being so wrong on this issue (or maybe a prelude to cause in invading Syria). They get caught up in knowing they were right, that they pick and choose the arguments to assuage their lack of judgement in understanding the evidence in the first place. They are blinded by their own narrow world view. You really don't want idealogue running the country. Great for the research institutions. But you want someone who is skeptical of all positions and not faith bound, to our ruin, making assessments.

I think they forgot the part of the prayer "and dear Lord make me wise enough to know the difference and the courage to admit when I was wrong."

Lightning Rod
09-20-2004, 09:54 AM
“What was found was the whiff's of the WMD stash that the US sold to Sadam under the Reagan administration. And this material was degraded to the level that it was worthless.”

Good lord Man,
Please provide one credible source that The United States under “any” administration has “ever” sold chemical or biological weapons to “any” country. Please, please please oh Pretty Please humor me and do this.


I am not at all pleased with this administrations handling of Iraq after the time Dubya claimed “mission accomplished”. I think that this administration has put in place rules of engagement that are too restrictive. This was done in an attempt to minimize Iraqi casualties and have resulted in more Americans Killed or wounded than should have been. The Army’s job is to kill people, make a lot of noise and break things. If they are going to be put in hostile territory I don’t want them being told “don’t fire until fired upon.” Screw that! I think we would have had a lot less problems had not been so nice and civilized.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 10:28 AM
So if you want to laugh about the seriousness of this possible failure of this administration's ability to remove without doubt WMD go right ahead.


Try rereading my post Tiptap, I’m laughing at your “obsession”. ROFL

KCWolfman
09-20-2004, 10:33 AM
But it is still all in your head, like your story. The proof that the embargo was ineffective, that the inspections had no validity, would have been that stores of WMD, assembled and ready to use, that would have been discovered with the defeat of Sadam.

What was found was the whiff's of the WMD stash that the US sold to Sadam under the Reagan administration. And this material was degraded to the level that it was worthless.

Or the more ominous conclusion. That in invading Iraq, we failed to control the cache and we delivered into the black market the stores of WMD.

It is at least understandable that you were taken in by the bluff Sadam portrayed during those 12 years, that he had WMD and could generate them himself (not delivered by the Reagan Adm.). What is not understandable is that you continue to be decieved by this crony's same echoed lies now when the evidence, the physical evidence of material, both finished product and manufactoring industry, is zilch.

The evidence, not words of a meglomaniacal despot, but physical evidence of real capability, supports that the embargo and inspections were successful in removing WMD from Sadam's arsenal and in addition the embargo was successful in degrading the rest of Sadam's military, making a walk-over to Bagdad the result of US invasion.

I think you, like your friend, are still lost in your obsessions.
I guess if you consider sanctions in which the UN and their buddies illegally absconded billions of dollars worth of crude oil to be so effective that they themselves attempted to block the US from completing a signed treaty - more power to you.

tiptap
09-20-2004, 10:45 AM
“What was found was the whiff's of the WMD stash that the US sold to Sadam under the Reagan administration. And this material was degraded to the level that it was worthless.”

Good lord Man,
Please provide one credible source that The United States under “any” administration has “ever” sold chemical or biological weapons to “any” country. Please, please please oh Pretty Please humor me and do this.


I am not at all pleased with this administrations handling of Iraq after the time Dubya claimed “mission accomplished”. I think that this administration has put in place rules of engagement that are too restrictive. This was done in an attempt to minimize Iraqi casualties and have resulted in more Americans Killed or wounded than should have been. The Army’s job is to kill people, make a lot of noise and break things. If they are going to be put in hostile territory I don’t want them being told “don’t fire until fired upon.” Screw that! I think we would have had a lot less problems had not been so nice and civilized.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A52241-2002Dec29&notFound=true

The story of U.S. involvement with Saddam Hussein in the years before his 1990 attack on Kuwait -- which included large-scale intelligence sharing, supply of cluster bombs through a Chilean front company, and facilitating Iraq's acquisition of chemical and biological precursors -- is a topical example of the underside of U.S. foreign policy. It is a world in which deals can be struck with dictators, human rights violations sometimes overlooked, and accommodations made with arms proliferators, all on the principle that the "enemy of my enemy is my friend."

My statement is perhaps to short to be completely representative of US culpability in Sadam's WMD. We did not sell to the Iraqis any weapons from our stockpile. After all we have a treaty in place banning this. What we did do is provide expertise, facilitated acquisition of those agents and those materials directly related to developement of WMD and delivery systems both chemical and biological. And the informational expertise allowed these supplied materials to be assembled into working weapons.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 11:00 AM
We did not sell to the Iraqis any weapons from our stockpile.

:hmmm:

tiptap
09-20-2004, 11:07 AM
I guess if you consider sanctions in which the UN and their buddies illegally absconded billions of dollars worth of crude oil to be so effective that they themselves attempted to block the US from completing a signed treaty - more power to you.

Address the success of deterring WMD first, then we can raise the questions of improper financial oversight of the "OIL for FOOD."

And what treaty are you referring to.... who were the signees? over what?

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 11:11 AM
Address the success of deterring WMD first, then we can raise the questions of improper financial oversight of the "OIL for FOOD."


There are thousands of gallons of nerve and blister agent along with thousands of liters of Anthrax that were found by UN Weapons Detectives after Gulf War V1.0 that are still unaccounted for. Where’d they go? Do you call this success?

tiptap
09-20-2004, 11:16 AM
Try rereading my post Tiptap, I’m laughing at your “obsession”. ROFL

Yes I understood your implication. My 'obssession,' as opposed to this administrations and its supporters obssession, has not led to a 1000 American deaths and 200 billion expediture for Iraq. It is always fun to bring humor about such losesl

tiptap
09-20-2004, 11:45 AM
There are thousands of gallons of nerve and blister agent along with thousands of liters of Anthrax that were found by UN Weapons Detectives after Gulf War V1.0 that are still unaccounted for. Where’d they go? Do you call this success?

Well over 12 years, either they degraded (you have to be proactive in keeping the highly reactive precursors from becoming inert or biological agents from degrading) or you have to conclude that this administration has let all those thousand of liters disappear into the black market, at our peril

It is the conclusion of the majority report that Sadam's supply had deteriorated and was in this depleted state for 4 or 5 years. That is the conclusion of the US investigation. With the small caveat that all the manufactoring, raw materials and active weapon, that would be thousands of liters and tons of manufactoring equipment, was moved out of the country. Because there is NONE IN IRAQ.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 11:53 AM
Yes I understood your implication. My 'obssession,' as opposed to this administrations and its supporters obssession, has not led to a 1000 American deaths and 200 billion expediture for Iraq. It is always fun to bring humor about such losesl

So laughing at you=humor for the dead.

You really should get over yourself.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 11:58 AM
Well over 12 years, either they degraded (you have to be proactive in keeping the highly reactive precursors from becoming inert or biological agents from degrading) or you have to conclude that this administration has let all those thousand of liters disappear into the black market, at our peril


So, your going to bitch no mater what. I was beginning to reach that conclusion, but thanks for clarifying.

It is the conclusion of the majority report that Sadam's supply had deteriorated and was in this depleted state for 4 or 5 years. That is the conclusion of the US investigation. With the small caveat that all the manufactoring, raw materials and active weapon, that would be thousands of liters and tons of manufactoring equipment, was moved out of the country. Because there is NONE IN IRAQ.

Although I’m sure you need it to be, that’s not exactly true. Unexploded chemical ordinance from WWI is still being found and the Mustard gas as deadly today as it was the day it was fired.
Course Binary Chemical Shells are a convenient way around the shelf life problem of most nerve agents, no?

KCWolfman
09-20-2004, 12:17 PM
Address the success of deterring WMD first, then we can raise the questions of improper financial oversight of the "OIL for FOOD."

And what treaty are you referring to.... who were the signees? over what?
Financial Oversight?

Is that code for deliberate theft sponsored by a group who refused to allow introspection of a nation supplying illegal funds and profits to sponsor such groups as the PLO homocide bombers?

What a load of BS.

KCWolfman
09-20-2004, 12:19 PM
Yes I understood your implication. My 'obssession,' as opposed to this administrations and its supporters obssession, has not led to a 1000 American deaths and 200 billion expediture for Iraq. It is always fun to bring humor about such losesl
I wonder how much money was spent in Europe during WWI (not our war), Somalia (not our war), and Bosnia (not our war)?

Lightning Rod
09-20-2004, 12:31 PM
“What was found was the whiff's of the WMD stash that the US sold to Sadam under the Reagan administration. And this material was degraded to the level that it was worthless.”

“We did not sell to the Iraqis any weapons from our stockpile.”

Thank you.

I have little love for our current administration but when you spout partisan rhetoric that is false, it weakens your argument. The only thing I have ever seen that is remotely related to WMDs that I know to be true, is that Iraq purchased some smallpox samples supposedly so that they could produce Vaccines from it. This was done prior to The Iran Iraq war and before Iraq was considered a hostile nation. Was that stupid of us? Yes it was but, there is no evidence of malice or intentional deceit on our part. In the Iran Iraq war the United States as we often do, picked what we considered the lesser of two evils in giving some support to Iraq so that they would not be defeated by Iran. We really didn’t like either country but allowing Iran to win and thus become the dominate power in the Middle East was not in our best interest. Our support for them was short lived and not significant. I do not think the current or the previous 3 administrations did a very good job in our Middle Eastern relations and our “intelligence” has obviously been less than stellar. Yet it has been consistent. You either have to believe that Bush Sr., Clinton and dubya all lied about Sadam and were willing to put their political agenda above human life (sad but possible) or they were acting on good faith from the information at hand. I have posed this simple question at least a dozen times and have yet to get anyone from the left to address it. To be fair it also takes the Rights fun away at claiming Clinton was shooting missiles to try and distract America from the BJ scandal.

tiptap
09-20-2004, 12:43 PM
So, your going to bitch no mater what. I was beginning to reach that conclusion, but thanks for clarifying.



Although I’m sure you need it to be, that’s not exactly true. Unexploded chemical ordinance from WWI is still being found and the Mustard gas as deadly today as it was the day it was fired.
Course Binary Chemical Shells are a convenient way around the shelf life problem of most nerve agents, no?

I stated my concluded opinion. There were no WMD for at least 5 years in Iraq. The embargo worked in removing and degrading Sadam's arsenal.

It is your conclusion that these WMD are still somewhere. If in the unlikely event that you are correct, that they still exist from Sadam's arsenal, how am I to conclude otherwise than this material was removed from Iraq and this administration failed to secure these weapons when invading Iraq.

You don't get a "Get Out of Jail Free" card because you CANNOT imagine how refined material would degrade and because you CAN imagine that this administration let this arsenal slip out of Iraq. You're no less intransigent in your playing both sides of the argument. The difference is that the evidence before us is that THERE ARE NO WMD IN IRAQ and my assessment is that the administration was profoundly wrong in judging the effectiveness of the embargo and for only the cost of 1000 American lives and 200 billion dollars they get to see they were overwhelmingly wrong.

And the same combination of hubris and evidencial blinders has led them so far to such striking success in providing a safe, stable and lasting positive influence in Iraq and the surrounding countries.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 01:08 PM
I stated my concluded opinion. There were no WMD for at least 5 years in Iraq. The embargo worked in removing and degrading Sadam's arsenal.

It is your conclusion that these WMD are still somewhere. If in the unlikely event that you are correct, that they still exist from Sadam's arsenal, how am I to conclude otherwise than this material was removed from Iraq and this administration failed to secure these weapons when invading Iraq.


Uh, you do realize when posting this tripe that chemical weapons were found in Iraq earlier this year, don’t you? (http://www.katc.com/global/story.asp?s=1873019&ClientType=Print)

You don't get a "Get Out of Jail Free" card because you CANNOT imagine how refined material would degrade


Oh I can’t imagine, huh? Lets see, I’m a vet of Gulf War V1.0 formerly with ADA (Air Defense Artillery) with training in chemical/biological weapons attacks, decontamination of equipment and personal, and detecting and treating chemical/biological symptoms.
Where as you have training in what, running your flap?

The difference is that the evidence before us is that THERE ARE NO WMD IN IRAQ and my assessment is that the administration was profoundly wrong in judging the effectiveness of the embargo and for only the cost of 1000 American lives and 200 billion dollars they get to see they were overwhelmingly wrong.


You really need to try reading something other than DU. :rolleyes:

Hel'n
09-20-2004, 01:17 PM
Uh, you do realize when posting this tripe that chemical weapons were found in Iraq earlier this year, don’t you? (http://www.katc.com/global/story.asp?s=1873019&ClientType=Print)
You really need to try reading something other than DU. :rolleyes:

You're being disingenuous here and you know it. That was a reused canister with traces of sarin gas. It was being used as a makeshift roadside bomb. There were no stockpiles of sarin gas found. None whatsoever.

I suppose 1 reused cannister containing traces of sarin gas is enough to go to war though...

:shake:

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 01:21 PM
You're being disingenuous here and you know it. That was a reused canister with traces of sarin gas. It was being used as a makeshift roadside bomb. There were no stockpiles of sarin gas found. None whatsoever.

I suppose 1 reused cannister containing traces of sarin gas is enough to go to war though...

:shake:

Where did I say the “stock piles” were found?
In fact, if you’d try reading for yourself, there have been around 14 chemical shells found, several of them binary, with chemicals loaded ready to fire. :rolleyes:

Tiptap’s, and apparently your, position is that there were no WMD’s period. This is rather definitive proof that there were, no?
Course, if you can’t figure out Google for yourself, I can provide several links talking about other instances of chemical shells that were found.

tiptap
09-20-2004, 02:13 PM
Uh, you do realize when posting this tripe that chemical weapons were found in Iraq earlier this year, don’t you? (http://www.katc.com/global/story.asp?s=1873019&ClientType=Print)



Oh I can’t imagine, huh? Lets see, I’m a vet of Gulf War V1.0 formerly with ADA (Air Defense Artillery) with training in chemical/biological weapons attacks, decontamination of equipment and personal, and detecting and treating chemical/biological symptoms.
Where as you have training in what, running your flap?



You really need to try reading something other than DU. :rolleyes:



Thank you Helen for raising the isolated nature of the reference to found chemical shells. It stands as reminder of what was professed; that there was thousands and thousands of liters of such material to be found.

Historically there was such volumes during the IRAN IRAQ WAR. But now a year after the US IRAQ INVASION no large caches of WMD have been found. They either were removed, destroyed or hidden. We know that the UN did oversee the destruction of some of these weapons. And it was the combined diligence of a resolved world led by the US and under UN sanctions that can claim success is this effort. US Government experts, including those who would oversee training in such weapons, concluded that IRAQ's arsenal had been effectively depleted for 4 to 5 years. This is the conclusion of those experts. The embargo was successful in removing WMD from Sadam's arsenal.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 02:19 PM
Thank you Helen for raising the isolated nature of the reference to found chemical shells. It stands as reminder of what was professed; that there was thousands and thousands of liters of such material to be found.

Historically there was such volumes during the IRAN IRAQ WAR. But now a year after the US IRAQ INVASION no large caches of WMD have been found. They either were removed, destroyed or hidden. We know that the UN did oversee the destruction of some of these weapons. And it was the combined diligence of a resolved world led by the US and under UN sanctions that can claim success is this effort. US Government experts, including those who would oversee training in such weapons, concluded that IRAQ's arsenal had been effectively depleted for 4 to 5 years. This is the conclusion of those experts. The embargo was successful in removing WMD from Sadam's arsenal.

Oh, so now the target has moved to, “there were no large cashes of WMD”. Just a few posts ago it was, “there were no WMD” period.
Or do you just need justification for being pizzed and Bushy provides an easy target for what you’d be doing anyway?

tiptap
09-20-2004, 02:26 PM
Oh, so now the target has moved to, “there were no large cashes of WMD”. Just a few posts ago it was, “there were no WMD” period.
Or do you just need justification for being pizzed and Bushy provides an easy target for what you’d be doing anyway?

Just a few posts ago you were yelling about thousand of liters. Which is it thousand and thousand of liters or a half dozen spent remnants of a real arsenal. Whose estimate is closer. How many liters were found? Is it closer to 0 or a 1000.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 02:31 PM
Thank you Helen for raising the isolated nature of the reference to found chemical shells. It stands as reminder of what was professed; that there was thousands and thousands of liters of such material to be found.

Historically there was such volumes during the IRAN IRAQ WAR. But now a year after the US IRAQ INVASION no large caches of WMD have been found. They either were removed, destroyed or hidden. We know that the UN did oversee the destruction of some of these weapons. And it was the combined diligence of a resolved world led by the US and under UN sanctions that can claim success is this effort. US Government experts, including those who would oversee training in such weapons, concluded that IRAQ's arsenal had been effectively depleted for 4 to 5 years. This is the conclusion of those experts. The embargo was successful in removing WMD from Sadam's arsenal.

But at least you not just reading what you want to hear and ignoring everything else.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 02:32 PM
Just a few posts ago you were yelling about thousand of liters. Which is it thousand and thousand of liters or a half dozen spent remnants of a real arsenal. Whose estimate is closer. How many liters were found? Is it closer to 0 or a 1000.

Please quote where I posted this was all there is, or maybe even where I claimed to be satisfied with a few chemical shells.

Your making claims that there were no WMDs, period.
I provided proof that there were indeed chemical weapons in Iraq ready for use.
Next whine?

tiptap
09-20-2004, 02:54 PM
POST 70

Look it up. Now you tell me what the total volume of agents found in Iraq? Is it a 1000 liters? Is it 100 liters? Is it 10 liters?

You've got more potential of Mustard Gas in a gallon of Muriatic Acid obtained at your local hardware store than what has been found in Iraq as munitions. (Drop some manganese dioxide in the Muriatic Acid. Don't try this in a close environment kids.)

No WMD, there is no mass (you know BIG OVERWHELMING) destruction without the mass of material when it comes to chemical weapons.

this administration believed in the ruse of a meglomaniac over the physical evidence and it has cost us 1000 American lives and 200 billion dollars to validate what the evidence indicated before the war.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 03:11 PM
POST 70

Look it up. Now you tell me what the total volume of agents found in Iraq? Is it a 1000 liters? Is it 100 liters? Is it 10 liters?

You've got more potential of Mustard Gas in a gallon of Muriatic Acid obtained at your local hardware store than what has been found in Iraq as munitions. (Drop some manganese dioxide in the Muriatic Acid. Don't try this in a close environment kids.)

No WMD, there is no mass (you know BIG OVERWHELMING) destruction without the mass of material when it comes to chemical weapons.

this administration believed the rhetoric of a meglomaniac over the physical evidence and it has cost us 1000 American lives and 200 billion dollars to validate what the evidence indicated before the war.

Post #70, lets see.

There are thousands of gallons of nerve and blister agent along with thousands of liters of Anthrax that were found by UN Weapons Detectives after Gulf War V1.0 that are still unaccounted for. Where’d they go? Do you call this success?

Nope, no where in there do I say that 14 chemical shells is all there was to be found, nor do I imply that I’d be satisfied with 14 chemical shells. Care to try again?

And your still trying to deflect from the fact that the UN found thousands of gallons of nerve and blister agents along with thousands of liters of Anthrax that are still unaccounted for.

tiptap
09-20-2004, 03:45 PM
Post #70, lets see.



Nope, no where in there do I say that 14 chemical shells is all there was to be found, nor do I imply that I’d be satisfied with 14 chemical shells. Care to try again?

And your still trying to deflect from the fact that the UN found thousands of gallons of nerve and blister agents along with thousands of liters of Anthrax that are still unaccounted for.

Inquiring minds want to know where is the thousands of liters of nerve and blister agents along with thousands of liters of Anthrax? This was indicated at the end of the first IRAQ WAR. That would have been 12 years ago.

Today we have the 14 chemical shells represents about 30 liters (155 millimeter halved then squared times PI times half meter length comes out to 28 liters if we assume all of the shell contains the chemical agent and nothing else). That is 30 liters max versus a claim that we would find 1000s of liters of nerve, blister and Anthrax weapons.

This is why the the US Government concluded that Sadam's arsenal has been effectively eliminated for 4 to 5 years. They had depleted their stockpile. The embargo kept them from resupplying their arsenal. And It took 1000 American lives and 200 billion dollars to provide enough evidence to reach the same conclusion as before the war. Because this administration elevated the ruse of a maglomaniac to a fact to advance their war on Iraq.

Change my units to liters. the calculations was in liters and I put down gallons.

Duck Dog
09-20-2004, 03:46 PM
Today we have the 14 chemical shells represents about 30 gallon (155 millimeter halved then squared times PI times half meter length comes out to 28 gallons if we assume all of the shell contains the chemical agent and nothing else). That is 30 gallons max versus a claim that we would find 1000s of liters of nerve, blister and Anthrax weapons.



Which is more than enough to kill the Kurds and the Kuwaities.

Next question please.

Radar Chief
09-20-2004, 03:57 PM
Inquiring minds want to know where is the thousands of liters of nerve and blister agents along with thousands of liters of Anthrax? This was indicated at the end of the first IRAQ WAR. That would have been 12 years ago.


You need to adjust your timeline, the UN was finding stuff Saddam didn’t have up until ’98 when he kicked them out. And here I thought you were spose’da know something about this.

Today we have the 14 chemical shells represents about 30 gallon (155 millimeter halved then squared times PI times half meter length comes out to 28 gallons if we assume all of the shell contains the chemical agent and nothing else). That is 30 gallons max versus a claim that we would find 1000s of liters of nerve, blister and Anthrax weapons.


Try FOUND, the UN found this stuff before Saddam kicked them out for finding what he didn’t have, but every implication was that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

This is why the the US Government concluded that Sadam's arsenal has been effectively eliminated for 4 to 5 years. They had depleted their stockpile. The embargo kept them from resupplying their arsenal. And It took 1000 American lives and 200 billion dollars to provide enough evidence to reach the same conclusion as before the war. Because this administration elevated the ruse of a maglomaniac to a fact to advance their war on Iraq.

“Depleted”? Where? On what? Couldn’t “resupply”? But, but, but, I thought you could get this stuff at Home Depot?

Calcountry
11-03-2004, 06:14 PM
Biatch,

I ain't a liberal.

I am somebody that expects the greatest country in the world to have a better leader than the incompetent and duplicitous fool that is going to be fired.

He is a failure and you need to remember your current attitude 6 weeks from now.

There are plenty of folks on Chiefs Planet that used to be pro-Bush and who now stay far away from this sub-forum because of the mindless Bush ratifying loozers that populate it.

It is going to be a cold winter for the Bushes this year, maybe his regular guy azz will invite fools like you to a Bar B Q.

I doubt it. Once he is ousted, he will go back to being the snob that he truly is.
Its gonna be a great Thanksgiving this year! We give thanks that the arrogant intelligentsia, like you, were not able to convince a majority of American's to drink their kool aid.

Who looks like a fool now BITCH!

jettio
11-03-2004, 07:27 PM
Its gonna be a great Thanksgiving this year! We give thanks that the arrogant intelligentsia, like you, were not able to convince a majority of American's to drink their kool aid.

Who looks like a fool now BITCH!

Save for being wrong in my prediction, I stand by everything I posted about the merits of the candidates.

B*sh won because he has led people to believe that he will install a Supreme Court that will restore the government's ability to enact pre Roe v. Wade abortion restrictions, and these folks showed up and voted for him.

B*sh has in the past led people to believe that Saddam was tied to 9/11, was an imminent threat, and that US troops would receive a warm welcome in Iraq.

I would not be surprised if B*sh betrays the people that got him over the hump. Will be interesting to see.

But the US soldiers and the Iraqi innocents that were made dead or wounded in Iraq are still as dead and wounded as they were before the election.

Those were my main issues, abuse of trust and incompetence. Leaders that intentionally mislead should not be trusted and military leaders that miscalculate into preventable errors should be relieved at first opportunity.

I will have to pray that he will do a better job, but I sure don't expect anything different from Stooges.

You can be happy about it all you want, but the reality is that B*sh is a gifted politician, but, on the whole, a very poor president to this point.

B2chiefsfan
11-03-2004, 07:32 PM
Save for being wrong in my prediction, I stand by everything I posted about the merits of the candidates.

B*sh won because he has led people to believe that he will install a Supreme Court that will restore the government's ability to enact pre Roe v. Wade abortion restrictions, and these folks showed up and voted for him.

B*sh has in the past led people to believe that Saddam was tied to 9/11, was an imminent threat, and that US troops would recieve a warm welcome in Iraq.

I would not be surprised if B*sh betrays the people that got him over the hump. Will be interesting to see.

But the US soldiers and the Iraqi innocents that were made dead or wounded in Iraq are still as dead and wounded as they were before the election.

That was my main issues, Leaders that intentionally mislead shoudl not be trusted and military leaders that miscalculate into preventable errors should be relieved at first opportunity.

I will have to pray that he will do a better job, but I sure don't expect anything different from Stooges.


Well, at least the one who has a knack for it didn't get in.