Who Is Lying About Iraq?

[Mr. Intenseone]

I doubt the Liberals on this board will read this, but............



http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007540

[240 is Back]

dude, the war is a stall to get the pipeline in.  everything else is theater.  all the support here by politicians is to get the conservative base to nominate you for president.  all the non-support is to get votes from 72% of the gen pop.  Everyone knows we're there for the long run.

[Mr. Intenseone]

dude, the war is a stall to get the pipeline in.  everything else is theater.  all the support here by politicians is to get the conservative base to nominate you for president.  all the non-support is to get votes from 72% of the gen pop.  Everyone knows we're there for the long run.

Didn't read it did ya?

[240 is Back]

I did.  It's an attempt at revisionist history.  They're attempting to re-sell the facts (of Feith, WMD, libby, etc) in order to drum up support past 30%.

We needed the war and the average american couldn't rub his brain cells together and understand the reasons, and we didn't want UN heat on our back.  So, we made up bullshit reasons (which were called lies at the time, and have been proven to be lies now) to fight, we got our fight, and it's going as planned.

[Dos Equis]

I doubt the Liberals on this board will read this, but............



http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007540

Excellent.  It is absolutely incredible how liberals in Congress and certain segments of the media have been able to spin this whole "lie" nonsense. 

So who is lying?  I'd say Harry Reid (among others).     

[The Enigma]

I doubt the Liberals on this board will read this, but............



http://www.opinionjournal.com/extra/?id=110007540

If I'm not mistaken......The WSJ (which I read daily) is very Neocon.

In fact, R. Murdoch from "Faux" News is attempting to buy the WSJ.

IMHO, zero credibility remains in this WSJ "opinion". 

[MikeThaMachine]

dude, the war is a stall to get the pipeline in.  everything else is theater.  all the support here by politicians is to get the conservative base to nominate you for president.  all the non-support is to get votes from 72% of the gen pop.  Everyone knows we're there for the long run.

That's a blanket statement if I've ever seen one... You seem to always think you know why things are goin on and it changes every few months. Yes we may be doing something with a pipeline but do you think that's the only cause for all of this, I highly doubt it. We are getting allot of shit done that's in our best interest and a pipeline may be only a small part of a bigger picture. BTW on the way home from work at a gas station this guy was handing out cards with like 18 videos to download from Google that are about 9/11 and all that, it says at the bottom (for after you have viewed them all) "I'm happy you found the TRUTH and the LIBERATING insight to survive" then the guys name and phone #. You ever get anything like that?

[Decker]

I am not convinced that Congress's investigation into the truth of the operations of the Office of Special Plans was complete.

Retired Lt. Col. Karen Kwiatowski worked along with the OSP and determined that it was a whitewash office creating disinformation.

Reporter Sy Hersh, who exposed Abu Ghraib and Guantonomo torture stories reported the same thing from other sources.

The accusation of lying is a difficult one to pin on political figures.

That's why I stand by the assertion that the Bush Administration broke the law by ordering the attack on Iraq before the WMD inspectors finished their jobs.

Whether Bush, Clinton, Cheney, Reid or the man in the moon believed Iraq had WMDs or not is TOTALLY IMMATERIAL to the charge that Bush ordered an illegal invasion.

[Camel Jockey]

That's a blanket statement if I've ever seen one... You seem to always think you know why things are goin on and it changes every few months. Yes we may be doing something with a pipeline but do you think that's the only cause for all of this, I highly doubt it. We are getting allot of shit done that's in our best interest and a pipeline may be only a small part of a bigger picture. BTW on the way home from work at a gas station this guy was handing out cards with like 18 videos to download from Google that are about 9/11 and all that, it says at the bottom (for after you have viewed them all) "I'm happy you found the TRUTH and the LIBERATING insight to survive" then the guys name and phone #. You ever get anything like that?

The pipeline es numero uno. Coming in second are striking positions on Iran and even India and China. 

[MikeThaMachine]

The pipeline es numero uno. Coming in second are striking positions on Iran and even India and China. 

OK mister government insider

[Camel Jockey]

OK mister government insider

Okay.. Then why don't you give us the key reasons why we're still there?

Is it to breed more insurgents and give more excuses for people to hate us?

Is it to bring democracy to the Iraqi people? 

Is it because the american people give a damn about Iraq?

Take the fucking 'THESE COLORS DON'T RUN' sticker off of your pickup and wake the fuck up.

[240 is Back]

actually mike, it's no big secret.  Everytime you hear a politician talk about "our interests in the region", they mean oil and war positioning should we need it.   If China could take us out without being hit back, they would in a minute.  They'd own the global economy.  ANd they blew up a satellite recently- that's scary.  Suppose china took down 80 of our satellites at once and set off a bunch of nukes (brought in thru mex border) in key places, then launched the full arsenal.  we'd be fvcked, and retaliatory capacity would be very limited.  

The fact they know our bases in Iraq and Afghanistan would clean their plate is a helluva deterrant.  I want the bases there, because I know other nations won't sneak attack us, as we have means of retaliation in their backyard.  

[MikeThaMachine]

Okay.. Then why don't you give us the key reasons why we're still there?

Is it to breed more insurgents and give more excuses for people to hate us?

Is it to bring democracy to the Iraqi people? 

Is it because the american people give a damn about Iraq?

Take the fucking 'THESE COLORS DON'T RUN' sticker off of your pickup and wake the fuck up.

Hey I don't head any top government agencies therefore I don't make guesses or opinions and state them as fact douche bag.

[MikeThaMachine]

actually mike, it's no big secret.  Everytime you hear a politician talk about "our interests in the region", they mean oil and war positioning should we need it.   If China could take us out without being hit back, they would in a minute.  They'd own the global economy.  ANd they blew up a satellite recently- that's scary.  Suppose china took down 80 of our satellites at once and set off a bunch of nukes in key places, then launched the full arsenal.  we'd be fvcked, and retaliatory capacity would be very limited.  

The fact they know our bases in Iraq and Afghanistan would clean their plate is a helluva deterrant.  I want the bases there, because I know other nations won't sneak attack us, as we have means of retaliation in their backyard.  

I understand all that but I just don't think this is all about just a pipeline, but I think the pipeline is def a part of it all. Only time will tell.

[240 is Back]

I understand all that but I just don't think this is all about just a pipeline, but I think the pipeline is def a part of it all. Only time will tell.

It's 50/50.  We get to manage 75 trillion (or more, as they just upgraded the reserve size estimates) of oil in a time oil is running out.   That's bitchin'. 

We get to set up bases in a position where we can take out anything in Russia, China, India, Africa, or Europe very quickly.  That's insurance that no one is gonna pre-empt us in this time of dwindling global resources. 



EVERY AMERICAN supports these 2 goals, whether he admits or understands it, or not.   We want gas, and we want to know chinese nukes aren't going to ruin our day.  Taking Iraq provides that.  They used the WMD story to justify it, of course.  But it's working.  IMO, every American should do 2 things:  1) Admit we need these things, and 2) Admit we are taking them.

To deny their need shows ignorance.  To deny our actions shows a lack of courage or honesty with self.

[headhuntersix]

Yeah 240 and who would they trade with...they already enjoy economic hegemony over much of SE Asia. Besides I think we're opening something like 6 Walmarts a month over there. They can acomplish what they want with cash.

[240 is Back]

Yeah 240 and who would they trade with...they already enjoy economic hegemony over much of SE Asia. Besides I think we're opening something like 6 Walmarts a month over there. They can acomplish what they want with cash.

are you kidding?  The US has a stranglehold on most of the world's resources and a d*ck in the ass of most world leaders.  We own em. If there was no US, China would grab every one of these relationships, and more.  They have a billion people, most of whom work very hard and live in squalor.  You give them the fuel, technology, intellectual resources, etc from America and they take over the world - especially in light of their recent friendship treaty with Russia and Iran. 

If China could remove US competition and resource locks instantly, they would.  But our bases there mean they can't.

[headhuntersix]

Completely disagree..besides these folks are very patient. Given a few years and that rapid growth of their economy they won't need to resort to military action. They have a very large and rapidly growing military.But... it is very inexperienced. They have some area's where they are on the cutting edge..anti-satelite and anti-information systems warefare. They have a small Blue water navy. They are a threat to Taiwan but i think they will wait it out.

[Decker]

...EVERY AMERICAN supports these 2 goals, whether he admits or understands it, or not.   We want gas, and we want to know chinese nukes aren't going to ruin our day.  Taking Iraq provides that.  They used the WMD story to justify it, of course.  But it's working.  IMO, every American should do 2 things:  1) Admit we need these things, and 2) Admit we are taking them.

To deny their need shows ignorance.  To deny our actions shows a lack of courage or honesty with self.

I do not support those goals.

However my tax dollars do support those goals.  That's why I rail against the Bush administration and its war.

In short, I do believe that the american way of life is self-indulgent and decadently so regarding oil.  That can change.  And as for China and nukes, MAD (Mutually Assured Destruction) is still an effective deterrent.

[headhuntersix]

Well before I go off halfed cocked what do u support. Do u see any war as being justified...Do u see locking up a a relieable energy source in an unstable region a good thing for the US. Do u see the Islamofascists as a threat....

[Decker]

Well before I go off halfed cocked what do u support. Do u see any war as being justified...Do u see locking up a a relieable energy source in an unstable region a good thing for the US. Do u see the Islamofascists as a threat....

I like the law.  There’s something noble about the beauty of Justice realized. 

A war is legally justified when we are attacked, threatened with imminent attack, defending an ally (includes ongoing genocide) or the like.  It is arguable that any major military excursion after WWII has been unconstitutional—that’s only if you’re a strict constructionist of the US Constitution.

Locking up a reliable energy source by conquering a foreign country disgusts me.  It flies in the face of the law, the free market, and basic fairness.

I don’t see Islamofascists as a threat b/c that’s a term of propaganda.  I try not to use propaganda.

I see Al Qaeda as a threat.  Not a terrific threat, not yet, but a threat nonetheless.

[headhuntersix]

One more question before i debate u...u don't believe 911 CT stuff otherwise nothing we debate will have any basis.

[Decker]

One more question before i debate u...u don't believe 911 CT stuff otherwise nothing we debate will have any basis.

I believe that someone had foreknowledge of the event.  Why?  Look at all the put options on the airlines that scored after the attack.

I also have questions about how our state-of-the-art national defense web couldn't track and destroy the hijacked airplanes.  Year in and year out half of the US's budget is spent on defense. 

Normal procedures for handling an attack were not executed on 9/11.

I think those are reasonable points and questions.  If that disqualifies me, well, what's a guy to do?

[headhuntersix]

In a perfect world u would be right however....

Nobody not us not the folks in Europe, except fro the timy countries actually practice this crap. They may say the right thing but usually when they can take a swipe at the US because they are jealous of lost glories. Any country will, if they can try and exert some manner of control over natural resources. Everybody has done it at some point in their history. We doing it now but so has everybody else. And before u make the argument that its still doesn't make it right...if we don't somebody else will and we won't be calling the shots. If u don't want us to be a superpower then thats one thing but in order to maintain the standard of living that we enjoy..sometimes we have to do what we have to do. As for the Islamics..they are a HUGE threat to the WEst..not just us but Europe as well.  

[headhuntersix]

Nope those are pretty reasonable......We don't prepare fro the type of attack that was launched on 911. NNORAD was set up to look at outside threats first. Yes they can tract jets I guess but were not doing so 0n 911. They expect to see Nukes not Boeing 707's. They expect to see a massive ground fire..follow by inbound missle tracks. They then try to quickly confirm with our other allies etc. None of this was seen on 911 and by the time the jets hiut it was to late and chaos ensued,