real demands for new mod

[OzmO]

irresponsibly? do you remember 911? we were scared shitless of another attack,, from what we knew we had to expect a  chain of terrorist event.. we had to stop any threat immediately. turns out the threat wasnt as serious as we thought, but thats a different story.
and stop saying HE got us into war,, use the term THEY

 

FOR me this is very simple.  "they" was not Iraq.  Iraq and Saddam did not commit a terrorist attack on the US.   "They" was Al Queda/Taliban.  So therefore "HE" did get us into a war.   

Shoot first and ask questions later IS irresponsible and that's exactly what happened here.

[24KT]

i have no problem with anyone bashing bush,, hes in the highest position you can achieve in life and what he does is up for criticism. believe it or not i put him at fault for several things.. but most cross the line and criticism has turned into hate. some of you act like he fired you from your job,took your money, and killed your family. thats why i always use the term 'angry liberal'.. the extreme liberals that i deal with everyday seem like pissed off people, and bush is a great target

GUILTY, GUILTY, GUILTY

...and he's done alot of way worse crap too.

[BRUCE]

 

FOR me this is very simple.  "they" was not Iraq.  Iraq and Saddam did not commit a terrorist attack on the US.   "They" was Al Queda/Taliban.  So therefore "HE" did get us into a war.   

Shoot first and ask questions later IS irresponsible and that's exactly what happened here.

Or it might have just had something to do with 10 years plus of Saddam defying UN resolutions and the UN doing stuff all about it.  Guess who has the most to fear of Saddam with a nuclear weapon.

[Hugo Chavez]

Berserker, I am not trying to get you replaced as mod.  We have 3 mods here, and they are all quite liberal.  Delusional Liberal has not been making any contributions lately, so a new mod should be chosen to replace him.  The non stop Bush bashing gets old.  The one thead of Bush positives was just put up to placate us.  We will not be placated!  I know there are members who would post here but do not because there is no balance to the forum.  Why do you seem so afraid to have one quality, conservate member elected to moderator?  This should be a true democracy, not a monopoly!  I think we can make this board better than it is now.

DL is not liberal.  Ozmo was noted by nearly everyone as being very middle of the road and people wanted him as middle mod because he never had a history of siding with one political leaning.  He would often call BS on a righty right after he called BS on a lefty.  He was overwhelming chosen for these characteristics.  I'm the left leaning mod... If you want balance, having a different righty mod is not going to help you.  What, if say Bruce is modded in that position there's going to be more balance to the forum?  No, his posts aren't going to change are they? 

For those that are newer to the forum, please know why the mod balance was created.

A quoted post of mine, please review this.

A missunderstanding I'm thinking... Remembering back, some of the accusations from some of the people posting in general was that threads would get deleted or merged and in general harsh policy applied to certain people like you or me because the board mods leaned the other way politically.  The balance is so that there is comfort in this area.  A person can post freely knowing that there is not a board of mods that leans all one way politically.  It also means that the accusation can't be levied in the first place.  It also makes it possible for any mod to participate in the board like a normal poster.  Because the person you are arguing with, may not be comfortable bringing an issue to you the very next day.  Since we adopted the mod range, it means everyone should have another choice of mod to go to nullifying the issue before it ever happens.  It was thought that this board would best benefit from the range for these reasons because it is a political board where sides do get drawn and drawn often.  So yes I do agree that politics has nothing to do with being a good mod, but the political balance is there for safety of all who come to the board and is there for us mods too!  Otherwise I would have to guard my participation extensively for the fairness of all.  Hope that explains why there should be a mod balance.  You are also right that the balance of the board comes from those who post here, not from the mod balance.  The mod balance is for the security of all the users, but really has nothing to do with the board balance that is indeed made up of the participants and in that aspect I'm just 1 more voice in a board of voices no better than anyone else.  I don't expect people to listen to what I have to say politically more because I'm a mod.  I would hope I'm gauged like everyone else with my political beliefs.

[240 is Back]

irresponsibly? do you remember 911? we were scared shitless of another attack,, from what we knew we had to expect a  chain of terrorist event.. we had to stop any threat immediately. turns out the threat wasnt as serious as we thought, but thats a different story.
and stop saying HE got us into war,, use the term THEY

If we had to stop the threat immediately, why is the border still wide open, 6 years later?

Seriously, I saw a tv show where a guy rode an elephant across the border.

If the white house was truly worried, that border would be tightened.  If they're not, and they just want to use borrowing to pay for an oil war in the mid east, then the border would be ignored.

[kh300]

 

FOR me this is very simple.  "they" was not Iraq.  Iraq and Saddam did not commit a terrorist attack on the US.   "They" was Al Queda/Taliban.  So therefore "HE" did get us into a war.   

Shoot first and ask questions later IS irresponsible and that's exactly what happened here.

and if we received a threat from osama bin laden prior to 911,and we went in to capture him, you would bitch about that too. bin laden didnt have wmds either.. and keep in mind we didnt declare war on iraq, were at war with the taliban and any terrorist organization. iraq just became a mess

[24KT]

Or it might have just had something to do with 10 years plus of Saddam defying UN resolutions and the UN doing stuff all about it.

 

If that's the case, Israel ought to be pooping in it's pants right now.
They've been defying UN resolutions and being condemned for it for years.

Guess who has the most to fear of Saddam with a nuclear weapon.

Which of course goes back to the Anti-Zionist argument that US military shouldn't be an instrument of Israeli policy.

[kh300]

If we had to stop the threat immediately, why is the border still wide open, 6 years later?

Seriously, I saw a tv show where a guy rode an elephant across the border.

If the white house was truly worried, that border would be tightened.  If they're not, and they just want to use borrowing to pay for an oil war in the mid east, then the border would be ignored.

i agree 100%.. the bush admin has fucked up when it comes to the border

[240 is Back]

i agree 100%.. the bush admin has fucked up when it comes to the border

then this beer's on me.

[24KT]

and if we received a threat from osama bin laden prior to 911,and we went in to capture him, you would bitch about that too. bin laden didnt have wmds either.. and keep in mind we didnt declare war on iraq, were at war with the taliban and any terrorist organization. iraq just became a mess

The Taliban was not in Iraq

[OzmO]

Or it might have just had something to do with 10 years plus of Saddam defying UN resolutions and the UN doing stuff all about it.  Guess who has the most to fear of Saddam with a nuclear weapon.

It makes sense until you realize that Saddam, wasn't insane in the respect that he wasn't willing to throw away all he had just to nuke the USA.  He wanted to keep his power, his palaces, women, etc...  That's why he wasn't a threat.  It was someone there we actually had indirect control over. 

All those resolution things?  political manuvering for different reasons at different times from both sides

[kh300]

The Taliban was not in Iraq

any terrorist organization,, any threat -keep in mind we were in the post 911 era

[OzmO]

any terrorist organization,, any threat -keep in mind we were in the post 911 era

then by that same reasoning, shouldn't we have invaded Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Iran, etc..?

but we didn't did we?  so that reasoning is moot.

KH,  this iraq war doesn't hold water. 

[BRUCE]

 

If that's the case, Israel ought to be pooping in it's pants right now.
They've been defying UN resolutions and being condemned for it for years.

Which of course goes back to the Anti-Zionist argument that US military shouldn't be an instrument of Israeli policy.

You're beyond lost if you're comparing Israel to Iraq.  And which resolution exactly are you referring to?

[BRUCE]

It makes sense until you realize that Saddam, wasn't insane in the respect that he wasn't willing to throw away all he had just to nuke the USA.  He wanted to keep his power, his palaces, women, etc...  That's why he wasn't a threat.  It was someone there we actually had indirect control over. 

All those resolution things?  political manuvering for different reasons at different times from both sides

You're giving a crazed despot way too much credit there.  Saddam was a madman on an unspeakable level, if you don't think he would have annihilated the US given a chance then you're mistaken.

[240 is Back]

You're beyond lost if you're comparing Israel to Iraq. 

Isr has nukes.  They are not allowed to have them.  They admitted it last year.

Of course, you only want to enforce rules on brown people with oil, right?

[kh300]

then by that same reasoning, shouldn't we have invaded Jordan, Egypt, Syria, Iran, etc..?

but we didn't did we?  so that reasoning is moot.

KH,  this iraq war doesn't hold water. 

remember all the shit that happend leading up to the war,, were were told that saddam had chemical weapons,, he didnt but he had the capability and the desire. he kicked out the weapons inspectos and he was up to no good,, we know of terrorists organizations that were hiding there.. jordon didnt give us the same threat

[BRUCE]

Isr has nukes.  They are not allowed to have them.  They admitted it last year.

Of course, you only want to enforce rules on brown people with oil, right?

Such idiocy, are you suggesting I'm racist?  Has Israel threatened to blow anyone off the map for bigoted reasons?

[OzmO]

You're giving a crazed despot way too much credit there.  Saddam was a madman on an unspeakable level, if you don't think he would have annihilated the US given a chance then you're mistaken.

Bruce,  think about it.  he held that country in his firm grip for what 25 years?  He ruthlessly calculated his rise to power.  He established material wealth in the billions.  He's no different than a mobster.  Very sane in that regard. 

The nuts you have to worry about are the ones who don't want all those material things, like those leading Iran.

becuase they will nuke us on principle and don;t mind dying in the process.

[OzmO]

remember all the shit that happend leading up to the war,, were were told that saddam had chemical weapons,, he didnt but he had the capability and the desire. he kicked out the weapons inspectos and he was up to no good,, we know of terrorists organizations that were hiding there.. jordon didnt give us the same threat

And Iran and NK didn't?   Iraq was a easy target to further our agenda of power in the area.  It was when preparation meets opportunity.

i understand why the american public for the most part was for it.  That doesn't mean it was prudent.  And we are seeing this now.

[kh300]

And Iran and NK didn't?   Iraq was a easy target to further our agenda of power in the area.  It was when preparation meets opportunity.

i understand why the american public for the most part was for it.  That doesn't mean it was prudent.  And we are seeing this now.

it was the right thing to do at THAT TIME.. of course if we could go back in history we would do a lot of things differently

[BRUCE]

Bruce,  think about it.  he held that country in his firm grip for what 25 years?  He ruthlessly calculated his rise to power.  He established material wealth in the billions.  He's no different than and mobster.  Very sane in that regard. 

The nuts you have to worry about are the ones who don't want all those material things, like those leading Iran.

becuase they will nuke us on principle and don;t mind dying in the process.

With that logic you will then be at a loss to explain why Saddam would ruthlessly attack both Kuwait and Iran, and why he would perform completely horrendous acts of torture on people for trivial reasons.  Did he have any need to do this to remail in power with all his wealth?  Certainly not - he was a madman, with a thirst for blood and deep hatred of America.

[OzmO]

it was the right thing to do at THAT TIME.. of course if we could go back in history we would do a lot of things differently

respectfully, i see what you saying, but do not agree.  i was against war from the start and i didn't even think it was going to end up like this. 

[OzmO]

With that logic you will then be at a loss to explain why Saddam would ruthlessly attack both Kuwait and Iran, and why he would perform completely horrendous acts of torture on people for trivial reasons.  Did he have any need to do this to remail in power with all his wealth?  Certainly not - he was a madman, with a thirst for blood and deep hatred of America.

i can easily.

Bugsy sees and opportunity to grab some more action and thinks once he does it the "bosses" won't trouble themselves trying to clean up the mess and re-balance power.  So Bugsy makes a miscalculation and ends up in the river with cement shoes.

Saddam at the time was having trouble with money and wealth becuase he was broke from the iran/iraq war.  (of course he had plenty of caviar, but not enough fill his stadium size swimming pool.  He saw an opportunity.  Them Kuwait bastards who had tons of money.  so he went after it.  America knew about it at least a few weeks before it happened.  Sat photographs and intel on logistics would have tipped them off just like anywhere these days.  He wasn't wanred about it from us so he went for it.   

As far as torture:  he had the power to fill his every whim.  Does that  make him a madman in that regard?  yes.  But we are talking about him losing all his power and wealth for making an attack on the USA.  no way he would have done it.  He probably tortured anyone who was even remotely a threat to him.  that's why he had a stable iraq and we can't seem to get there.

[240 is Back]

remember all the shit that happend leading up to the war,, were were told that saddam had chemical weapons,, he didnt but he had the capability and the desire. he kicked out the weapons inspectos and he was up to no good,, we know of terrorists organizations that were hiding there.. jordon didnt give us the same threat

Doug Feith cherry picked the intel.  The Pentagon audit admits it now.

People made decisions based upon the "iraq/al q/911" connections report that Feith wrote.

People made decisions on cherry picked intel.



Now, who directed Feith?  Rummy & Bush.