Americans embarrassed by Bush
Wannabe yuppie
Joined: Dec 2000
Posts: 25,918
Likes: 0
From: Madison, WI
Originally posted by /^Blackmagik^\
the possible al queda ties with iraq have been discussed repeatedly, ever since al queda claimed responsibility for the 9/11/01 attacks. the major reason we went into iraq was not that we thought iraq had WMD, the major reason was that iraq was corroberating with al queda. end of story. the reason that wasn't released to the public until after the fact is simple. you don't show your cards until everyone has made their bet. it's just common sense.
the possible al queda ties with iraq have been discussed repeatedly, ever since al queda claimed responsibility for the 9/11/01 attacks. the major reason we went into iraq was not that we thought iraq had WMD, the major reason was that iraq was corroberating with al queda. end of story. the reason that wasn't released to the public until after the fact is simple. you don't show your cards until everyone has made their bet. it's just common sense.
What's more insidious about what you're saying however, is that the justification given to the international community for why we were going into Iraq was the enforcement of a UN resolution on WMD. Which by the way, we do not have the authority to do without UN consent. If the real reason we went to Iraq was al Qaeda, then we as a country lied to the rest of the world about why we were going into Iraq.
Originally posted by DVPGSR
I agree the invasion of Iraq as a strike-first policy does make NK scared and I complete see where they are coming from when they demand a non agression pact. But what they are offering in return is something they already gave us in a deal that they did not honor under the Clinton admin. so why should the Bush admin. believe them now.
I agree the invasion of Iraq as a strike-first policy does make NK scared and I complete see where they are coming from when they demand a non agression pact. But what they are offering in return is something they already gave us in a deal that they did not honor under the Clinton admin. so why should the Bush admin. believe them now.
Originally posted by DVPGSR
I know I haven't been mislead by the Bush admin. I agree the intelligence before the war about Iraq's WMD was very poor, but at the time it seemed very logical from what Iraq and other world intelligence agencies were saying. But one of the reasons we went in there was that Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism...and now it is looking like they really were.
I know I haven't been mislead by the Bush admin. I agree the intelligence before the war about Iraq's WMD was very poor, but at the time it seemed very logical from what Iraq and other world intelligence agencies were saying. But one of the reasons we went in there was that Iraq was a state sponsor of terrorism...and now it is looking like they really were.
Originally posted by DVPGSR
I do agree with your reservations on the Patriot Act. I would like to see a better draft written, or amendments made to it to make it more effective, but less intrusive to the lives of good Americans.
I do agree with your reservations on the Patriot Act. I would like to see a better draft written, or amendments made to it to make it more effective, but less intrusive to the lives of good Americans.
Originally posted by DVPGSR
If the CIA met with terrorists it is on a whole different level than if Iraq met with them. and while we do not know the exact nature of the meetings, it does not take a highly intelligent person to figure out what topics were most likely on the agenda.
If the CIA met with terrorists it is on a whole different level than if Iraq met with them. and while we do not know the exact nature of the meetings, it does not take a highly intelligent person to figure out what topics were most likely on the agenda.
Originally posted by DVPGSR
What terrorist acts did Osama Bin Laden and the Mujahadeen commit when we were funding and supporting them during the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in the 80's? Al Quaida did not become a terrorist organization until Saudi Arabia was threatened by Iraq in the early 90's, Osama Bin Laden offered the help of his Mujahadeen in Afghanistan and was turned down for a UN coalition led by the US.
Actually to the Russians then they were still not terrorists. WE sponsored them but they had not become a terrorist organization. They were only defending Afghanistan from an invading army.
What terrorist acts did Osama Bin Laden and the Mujahadeen commit when we were funding and supporting them during the Russian invasion of Afghanistan in the 80's? Al Quaida did not become a terrorist organization until Saudi Arabia was threatened by Iraq in the early 90's, Osama Bin Laden offered the help of his Mujahadeen in Afghanistan and was turned down for a UN coalition led by the US.
Actually to the Russians then they were still not terrorists. WE sponsored them but they had not become a terrorist organization. They were only defending Afghanistan from an invading army.
Originally posted by DVPGSR
Today in Iraq I do not consider attacks against American soldiers as terrorist...it is part of a war. But when you launch rockets at hotels housing journalists, or blow up the UN and the Red Cross those are terrorist acts.
Today in Iraq I do not consider attacks against American soldiers as terrorist...it is part of a war. But when you launch rockets at hotels housing journalists, or blow up the UN and the Red Cross those are terrorist acts.
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 4,058
Likes: 0
From: Tampa, FL
Originally posted by DVPGSR
Today in Iraq I do not consider attacks against American soldiers as terrorist...it is part of a war. But when you launch rockets at hotels housing journalists, or blow up the UN and the Red Cross those are terrorist acts.
Today in Iraq I do not consider attacks against American soldiers as terrorist...it is part of a war. But when you launch rockets at hotels housing journalists, or blow up the UN and the Red Cross those are terrorist acts.